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

Why Evolve failed by the lead writer.

IbizaPocholo

NeoGAFs Kent Brockman


In brief;
1: We built a team to make a world. When I came onboard the artists outnumbered the programmers. And I think this was true for a long time. When I toured the office for the first time and saw the team, all the artists were watching David Attenborough documentaries and reading books about biology and anatomy and evolution. We believed we were making an alien world you were going to explore, and we intended to make it awesome. I can't even express the number of amazing creatures and behaviors we designed and implemented and then threw out because they were all a distraction.

That was the team we had. That team could have made a co-op game where four players explore an savage alien world and I think it would have gone down as one of the great games of the decade.

But there was no way to get that game greenlit. No one would pay us to make that game. The hook we pitched--and which we 100% believed in by the way--was 4v1.

You see, when you pitch a game to a publisher, they think the most important thing is "what is unique about this game that no one can get anywhere else?" So "it will be awesome and people will love it and it will sell 10 million copies" is not an answer, even if it's true. It has to have something they can put on the back of the box that separates your game from every other game.

Now, they don't hold their own games to this standard. They are perfectly happy spending $60m on the fifth sequel to something they already own developed internally that is indistinguishable from every other iteration of the same game. It's only YOUR game they hold to this somewhat absurd standard.
Well, 4v1 was awesome. It sounded awesome, everyone loved it, we prototyped it, and it worked. Sort of. A friend of mine said very early, and I think he was right "the reason it works is because we're all roleplaying playing Evolve." In other words, we all knew how we WISHED the game would work, and so that's how we played it.

When someone on the team finally got tired of this and started playing to win, it all sort of fell apart and never really recovered.
The fact that all the heroes were A: all different from each other, mechanically, and B: all the monsters were each different from each other, mechanically, AND neither Heroes nor Monsters used any of the same mechanics! Made it very very hard to balance new heroes and monsters. Like, the existence of Lazarus meant a lot of stuff we wanted to do, had to be super watered down because Lazarus broke all the rules. Maggies' pet trapjaw broke all the rules.

Heroes didn't have to feed. Heroes didn't level up. Heroes didn't pick abilities. It wasn't just asymmetrical, the two sides were playing fundamentally different games. That was a problem we never solved, it was always a problem. It meant all new content was a colossal pain to implement, forget balance, just implement. Just take this cool idea for a hero or a monster, and implement it. Super hard. Because there was always some other hero or monster ability that borked your stuff.

None of this would matter if the monster wasn't playable. If the monster were purely AI controlled, we could have made a much different, more fun, more engaging game with much much wider appeal. A 4 player co-op game where you explore an alien world and fight giant monsters, the giant monsters just aren't controlled by a player.

If you could hold all the game's unique features in your head, if you could play the game on its terms, rather than either A: yours or B: the genre's then it was often really fun. There was a very insightful review that said "we always complain we want something new, well Evolve is actually new." Nothing in Evolve worked the way the same items in other games worked. The sniper rifle didn't one-shot anything, it just put "weak spots" on things, so your allies did more damage. Now, this is perfectly in line with the co-operative nature of the game. A dude who can one-shot a monster has no place in Evolve. But it's not how anyone expects a sniper rifle to work.

So, we never really solved 4v1, it causes more problems that we ever imagined, and we didn't really have a team to make a competitive shooter. We had a team to build a world.

B: If your customer needs to find four friends to enjoy your game, maybe don't charge $60 for it. Because getting your friends to spend a total of $240 on a game (and you already spent $60 remember) is a hard fucking sell. Any other shooter, you can play by yourself and be an asshole even on a team and have fun. But Evolve, you have to co-operate. You can't jungle for 20 minutes by yourself, ganking every once in a while, or mid and ignore everyone, you have to actually cooperate, from the moment your boots hit the ground, and you never get to STOP cooperating and that only really works if you're playing with your friends.
So give the game away. Charge people for cosmetic stuff, but make the game free. Maximize your user-base. We were already thinking about this. We knew this, and THQ knew it. Alas, THQ went tits up.

C: If you release a game that lives and dies on online competitive play, maybe let the DevTeam update the game more often than once every three months.
In spite of EVERYTHING I said above, I sincerely believe there was nothing wrong with Evolve at launch we couldn't fix if we could update the game live. We had a great launch, tons of people bought the game, tons of people were playing it. They'd discoverer exploits and...we couldn't do anything about it. As news of these exploits propagated, the user base evaporated. We had local fixes, often in 24 hours...couldn't deploy them.

The reportage surrounding the release didn't really have anything to do with Evolve, as far as I could tell. It had to do with the zeitgeist of gamers at the time, and Evolve was the punching bag they chose. Websites were reporting on the cost of our DLC, and what it did, and were demonstrably wrong. Just...not true. Writers imagined nightmare scenarios, posted them, got clicks, and moved on without checking to see what was actually happening.

That was depressing but a lot of people bought the game and played it. That cheered us up. Tons of fans and fan art and fan sites and even cosplay, but it cost too much so folks who liked it couldn't get their friends to buy it and we couldn't update the game to make the people playing it happy.
 
Last edited:
Weren't monsters $15 and humans $8 each? Yeah, that's some of the worst priced DLC I've seen.

Your game failed because it was unbalanced, overpriced and not fun.
 
Last edited:
Kinda skimming through it, I think I agree with him. When I played Evolve at E3 when it debuted, I played with 3 other kids and their dad. Their dad was a shit monster and the three kids were morons. I literally solo'd the dad and I was disappointed having waited an hour for it. With that, I already knew the problem of Evolve and knew it was going to fail. You need all five players to be good and equal level for the game to be fun. It makes a good esport show where everyone is good, but with the average consumer, it's hard to make it fun.
 
Couldn't even understant what version should i have bought to get a somehow "full" experience out of my purchase, right now there are f2p games with value propositions WAY more clear than the mess Evolve was.
I dont think all multiplayer games should always cost less money or anything like that, but if you want to monetize like Evolve did, your base game needs to be free, no way im spending 60 bucks to get into a game with a worse monetization model than free games like Warframe.
 
They wanted to fuck over gamers but at the end they got what they deserved
 
It certainly had a lot of potential. But ultimately the 1v4 aspect gets stale really quick i can imagine, this is a genre that needs constant updates and changes to be fresh after a while and i honestly can't think of any way on how to achieve this with evolve.

All of the characters are hard-locked into a specific role and every game plays the same. It's boring.

Also at least for me the mass of DLC from the very beginning is extremely off-putting, don't try to hide the fact...i remember the announcement being a fkn poster with "Pre-order now for the new monster and this skin and this shit" at least show the game first. All of this talk about the digital-super-special-deluxe-give-us-money-kiss-my-ass-editions made me puke as well to be honest. The marketing didn't help the game a single bit.
 
Last edited:
its pretty clear half the people who posted didnt read the OP lol
giphy.webp
 
Shit concept, shit execution, shit game.

It was a terrible idea to star with, so it was no surprise it died on its arse.

Also, the laughable pricing structure and DLC, that meant they doubly deserving of it failing.
 
Last edited:
Very interesting thread, thank you. Interesting to see their thoughts (even if they do not mention the DLC problem, although hint at it via the cost problem.)

Shame we did not get the game they wanted to make, that sounds interesting. No game should force more than 2 player co-op to be fun though.
 
Friday the 13th has been a big success. So some of the reasons they give for failure are not valid, although they do make it more difficult.
 
Game was just unfun in a lot of ways. They also shouldn't have compared it to Left 4 Dead.
 
Last edited:
The developers knew 4v1 wasn't working and still decided to release it. Some games got cancelled for way less, can't say I feel bad for it bombing.
 
They DLC'd the game to death.

I was interested as a big fan of Left 4 Dead, but the DLC situation kept me away.

It's really too bad as the idea behind the game is still cool.
 
Evolve was awesome, but unfortunately faced an incredibly uphill battle on many fronts. Marketing and the average gamer's intelligence are probably the biggest problems they faced. Playing with randoms made me want to bang my head against the wall because players were either unwilling or incapable of learning how to play their roles properly, which eventually led me to play as Monster (Kraken) exclusively.
 
Evolve was awesome, but unfortunately faced an incredibly uphill battle on many fronts. Marketing and the average gamer's intelligence are probably the biggest problems they faced. Playing with randoms made me want to bang my head against the wall because players were either unwilling or incapable of learning how to play their roles properly, which eventually led me to play as Monster (Kraken) exclusively.

I played the F2P version and spent around 80 hours on it. The game is an absolute blast and I really REALLY enjoyed my time with it. VAST majority of randoms I met were totally fine and played well cooperatively. I struggle to think of a single game where people were trolling or going solo. The biggest problem the game had was that a lot of players really struggled with the monster play, as about 50% of my hunter games were overwhelming victories, 30% easy victories, 10% close victories, 8% close defeats and 2% complete defeats. It was a power fantasy game for me since most games were total slaughters.
 
Uh no. Evolved failed because you marketed it as being built as DLC from the ground up. Paying full price, then having to pay constant nickel and dime for items, monsters, cosmetics, etc. If it was F2P from the beginning then, it may have have survived. The classes and monsters were unbalanced and the map was way too big which made the matches way too long. It also didn't help that you had pre-orders going up before any footage at all.

V.2 fixed a lot of the issues, but it was a too little too late moment to stop the decline.
 
Man, their original idea sounds a lot like a Monster Hunter kind of game. I'm no developer or expert, but I would have gone for that pitch. I know what he means about publishers, but I don't know, that sounded way more interesting.
 
I played a couple of betas on PC if I remember correctly. The game was OK in itself, I think it had potential. I'm not a pro on MP games but it didn't feel unbalanced to me.

The DLC model was bullshit, that killed any interest I could have had on the game.

That said, exactly how much work would a "Lead Writer" have on a game like Evolve? I mean, how many writers did they need? What did they do once they finished writing up the concept, putting names to monsters, abilities, weapons, descriptions and one liners? It's not like the game had a rich lore behind it.
 
Thanks for posting this. I had high hopes for evolve which didn't pan out I think mostly because of the issues he cited. It was not a good casual game which was kind of how I wanted to play it similar to left for dead (which was a great casual game). Team composition was too important and matchmaking was not satisfying.

I think if they had gone the left for dead route in the sci-fi setting the tale might have turned out quite different. They only needed to include the 4 vs 1 as a game mode not as the primary mode.
 
I enjoyed Evolve for what it was, but the game did not have legs. I took too long many times to even find the monster sometimes.
 
I was so excited for this game when it was coming out. I was a huge fan of the original left 4 dead and I think I'm right in saying this was the same team that did that. The DLC stuff really didn't help but also i think the main problem with this game is that it often felt like a running simulator. I remember my thumb hurting from just holding the stick forward constantly for hours because you were spending 90% of the time either running from hunters or chasing after monsters. I think it needed some kind of mechanic to slow the chase down a bit more and steer the gameplay into more periods of investigate > trap > mini fight rather than a Benny Hill style run around.
 
It sounds like this guy would have rather made Monster Hunter rather than Evolve, but unfortunately someone was already making Monster Hunter.
 
Because it was a shit game with no originality released in a time when we didn't exactly know where PVP should go, and that's not like they had contributed to create much neither make it better (despite the second version), also the fact that it was a paid online game...
 
Comes across as a bit salty. Starts by admitting poor execution, but then blames the gaming media.
 
Because it was a shit game with no originality released in a time when we didn't exactly know where PVP should go, and that's not like they had contributed to create much neither make it better (despite the second version), also the fact that it was a paid online game...
I don't think you can say it was unoriginal. I can't remeber playing anything like it then or now to be honest. The division of roles were quite specific and meant everyone had to know what they were doing and the 4 v 1 with one side leveling up becoming overpowered is something I've never seen before or after.

I am not saying it worked but to call it unoriginal is simply untrue IMO.
 
I don't think it is a shit concept.

Dying lights online multi was fun and it was built around the same principle.

He sounds pretty sincere about what he speaks. I can't say the DLC was nice to consumers but I think their hearts were in the right place.

In such a competitive market especially if you're not in a position of power the choice between building what we wanted vs building what we know can get published is probably something aspiring AAA studios have to deal with a lot.

We seem so high and mighty with our opinions because we sit perched on our ivory tower, but you can't blame a thief for stealing food when he is starving.
 
Last edited:
Man, their original idea sounds a lot like a Monster Hunter kind of game. I'm no developer or expert, but I would have gone for that pitch. I know what he means about publishers, but I don't know, that sounded way more interesting.

Yeah it does, they should have just made it a co-op game where you and your buddies blast alien monsters instead of the whole "asymmetrical multiplayer" thing.
 
Evolve failed because dev/publisher weren't subtle enough, they did it too obviously, too straight! You must be gentle when it comes to anal...
They should have done like other publisher and wait to have a large blinded fanbase before going into milking, look at Activision Blizzard. EA etc
 
Last edited:
We built a team to make a world. When I came onboard the artists outnumbered the programmers. And I think this was true for a long time. When I toured the office for the first time and saw the team, all the artists were watching David Attenborough documentaries and reading books about biology and anatomy and evolution

it causes more problems that we ever imagined, and we didn't really have a team to make a competitive shooter. We had a team to build a world.
I think this is actually the problem.

Videogame customers still have a razor-sharp, brutal intolerance toward gameplay elements that don't work. They'll accept novelty, but the novelty has to be compelling enough to earn their time and their money. The "money" side of Evolve's history is pretty well known. I think that played a role. Fundamentally, no amount of cool xenobiology or world-crafting will compensate for lack of compelling content. Gamers can sniff that out.

The game sucked. I'm sorry.
 
Top Bottom