Brink

I played the beta, but not the final game, so maybe something got fucked up that I don't know about. Anyways, the graphics look good, art style was fine, environments were extremely detailed, and it was fun

I'd consider that good, yeah, Not 60$ good though, so I didn't buy it.

The director of Division left Ubi after the game came out.

I think that somehow bombed even harder than Destiny did.

Evolve was fun for about five games.
That's why the hype was so massive, people who had played it at shows only played one game or so, and they thought it was really fun. What they didn't know is that it got boring extremely fast.

People don't understand why a product was successful but still insist on making something similar just for the money.
Evolve is the best example. It was supposed to be something along the lines of Left4Dead but with only one big foe.
However the developers and the publisher as well didn't take into consideration that it could be boring to just run around an empty map trying to kill a monster that hides until it's strong enough to wipe you out with no problem.

Brink's problem probably was that the gameplay itself was pretty boring and unsatisfying.
The idea of a game to step into the footsteps of the Enemy Territory games is not.

I don't know enough about battleborn, but my guess would be that it had a shitty release date, too close to overwatch.
It probably isn't good enough of a product to compete with Overwatch as well.

I had at least 20 hours in the beta, I wasn't getting old of it

it just A: shouldn't have been 60$, and B: the publisher shouldn't have made like 3 different limited editions and DLC preorder bundles that made people think it had day 1 DLC when it didn't, which made people hate it

Bahahahaha, how fucking shit can your taste be? Its even worse than a normalfags

People buy a lot of shit, then publishers decide to see how much they can get away with, sometimes it backfires.

...

If you mean financially you're a retard, those were both some of the biggest launches of all times, Destiny sold shitloads and has the biggest and most persistent online community on consoles.

You seriously underestimate how retarded nornalfags are.

Let's be honest here. Evolve bombed cause they only had 1 Xenofu. The only reason people play Overwatch is cause the Waifus' are plentiful. No waifus Overwatch a shit.

People played TF2 back in the day despite there being no female characters.
Listen to what says; normalfags are just fucking stupid. Overwatch could be entirely male and it would probably be popular.

Simple: they aren't good or fun and therefore did not sell.

Devs, players and journos can make whatever excuse they want to explain this shit but there's really nothing more that can be said and unless devs actually understand this concept, it's never gonna be fixed. You do a good game, it gets sales. You do a bad game, it doesn't.

Brink was a generic shooter with loadouts that didn't stand out at all because the setting was underutilized, the microtransactions ruined the game and there's very little new there.

Evolve was a terrible concept from the start. The generalization of "it's Left4Dead but you only fight against the tank" shouldn't be accurate but it is, except for the little details that actually make it even worse like the tank running from you and the game being unbalanced on purpose at stages 1 and 3.

The Division is a shooter MMO. Why was this even supposed to sell? Or be interesting? Because people can be dicks in the PvP zones? Yeah, I'm sure that got a lot of a people interested in the game, except when they found out they would also be the ones getting shit on.

Battleborn was a terrible idea somehow even done worse. A MOBA in first person ain't new, there's Smite that's half-good at least. But they somehow made it even worse, more boring, even more simple and tried to compete with Overwatch at the same time!

In all 4 cases, there was never anything good going for those games except shiny graphics. There was no reason for sucess, to stand out and be recognized or apreciated. The only mystery here is not how did they fail but rather how did anyone ever even expect them to suceed?

You act like only good and fun games are what sell.

I act like that because that's true. Only good and fun games sell.
CoD might not be good but it's fun. At least for a very large amount of people. And therefore it sells.
Same for PES, FIFA, and other sports games, same for Need For Speed except the latest ones that weren't neither fun or good and guess what? Didn't sell.

Just remenber: just because YOU don't find them fun or good, doesn't mean everyone else does too.

That's not how it works, but okay.

Companies try to make and sell a brand instead of a product. The problem is that video games are not burgers or cola, so the product has to actually not be shit for people to like it.

Sex sells.
I'm surprised there are so many retards who think that videogame marketers don't know this.
Look at X-com 2, how many people bought that bullshit because of snek tits?
People here aren't magically of better quality then people out there, they are just as susceptible to hype and marketing as everyone else.

They both bombed, if they were a success marketing would already pushing that angle "all your friends play why dont you."

They spend way too much in marketing which makes a net profit hard unless they sell it to literally fucking everyone.

Look at the Wii, all the marketing in the world and it made a profit because even peoples grandmother bought it, fuck my grandma was able to pay for it with a life insurance rider because she got her doctor to say it was therapeutic.

It's just the free market at work.

Not a single person asked for these video games, yet they made them anyway.

It's their failure for not supplying something that is in demand.

Brink is kinda different from the rest. That game was straight up not finished. It needed another year or two in the oven.

The rest are just bad games.

You know what game didn't deserve the instantly dead playerbase? Fucking Max Payne 3. The multiplayer was very good in my opinion.

I mean, it's the only game in existence where you can use bullet time in multiplayer. That PvP was sick, but on day 1 it was already like one thousand players worldwide.

...

making FPS games for consoletards that only care about one at a time *brand game* thats the populat shit with other consoletards at the moment

My problem with Brink was it had some GOAT World building behind it I feel like there is an artist out there silently weeping at how his idea was wasted on the shitest FPS devs in the industry.

Instead of enforcing the 1v4 meme it should have been left 4 dead xeno edition. With the Monster being the tank and other players controlling wildlife.

I also did some research the game is dead but get this they apparently released a season 2 pack of hunters and a new female monster. Another big thing I found is how the devs are going to pull of a "relaunch" with a giant ass update

Marketing.

lmao Evolve in like 5 bucks on G2A 7 if you want the DLC

Overwatch was successful because it had the right kind of porn where Evolve had the wrong kind of porn. If Overwatch had porn of the gorilla in mass getting fucked by the male characters in the game, the outcome would be different. Normalfags aren't bothered by Tracer, Widowmaker, and Mei getting fucked since it's Vanilla.

Sold on the idea of being Mirror's Edge multiplayer with classes, ended up a buggy piece of shit with movement mechanics less advanced that Unreal Tournament from a decade earlier
Turtle Rock thought they could resell half of Left4Dead for the same price
made lodsemone, suffered from a semi-neat premise being bogged in generic gameplay
an attempt to compete directly with Blizzard, which literally never ends well, much like a land invasion of Russia right before winter

...

The industry is out of touch with its consumers, pure and simple. On one end of the spectrum you got 60+ suits who want to make games that "sell well" and thus aim at the lowest common denominator, on the other end you have hipster fags who want to make games that "tell a story, maaaan".

We're in the middle, wondering why nobody understands.

Battleborn died the moment the guy pitching it to old Randy said the word "Moba". It was buried when they decided to make everything about it ugly as sin. Don't give Blizzard credit they don't deserve.

It will correct itself eventually.

Post the Muslim half monster scientist hunter

It's not the porn, mang. Lots of games get porn and don't sell, lots of games don't get porn and sell.
It's just that the entire premise for Evolve was terrible but nobody had the courage to say it to the devs properly.

A game designed to be unbalanced for the hunters in the first 2 stages forces the monster to always play for the last stage and this means 20-30 minutes of boredom for the other 4 players. But since he's supposed to be better at stage 3, then balance goes out the window again but through the other wall instead. It's always an unbalanced mess by design where the game actually sucks if the monster is caught too soon but is horribly boring for a long time if he isn't.
Playing as the monster was the only fun you could have because at least there was something more to do while running around (eating) while hunters did nothing but gaze at jetpack bars going down.

The game would be a lot better with more players controlling small aliens, if the monster respawned but evolved with damage caused to the hunters and if the hunters had another objective to fullfill like "evacuate all these civilians" or "hunt X bugs".
This is why they are idiots. Because there were so many ways to fix this shit, to make it an actually interesting game, and they never did any,

That wasn't really the problem with Battleborn. Blizzard brand recognition giving Overwatch a bit of an edge would also mean the same for Battleborn with Borderlands, after all.

The problem is that they actually made a MOBA with all the problems that genre has in first person and yet also had the gall to oversimply it even more than usual and ruin the entire game with it.
As it stands, it's more profitable for your team to roam the map and farm tiny little cyrstals than fighting against the other team. For a game that's PvP centric, fighting against other players is somehow not what you're supposed to do.
The fact that your equipment is token as fuck with just 3 pieces, one for attack, other for defense and another for movement that you activate to get them working in game doesn't even help either.

Gearbox is just full of retarded people. Everyone kept complaining how Borderlands was braindead simple with a single skill per character and how the inventory simply didn't had enough different items to make it interesting. So they grab a MOBA and do the same shit all over again and even worse.

Then why isn't Yakuza a blockbuster?

Evolve forgot to do the simplest and most important thing in a video game. You give people an objective to fight over. That's fucking standard, because you are always supposed to direct players toward each other to make the action happen.

Oh shit it is

I'll admit I liked how the hunters looked in evolve

See: Natural Selection

The division actually sold well, everyone hated it but ubishit made their money back.

...

How?

That was more due to the rampant cheating that Rockstar refused to deal with until it was too late. Damn shame, it was a pretty great multiplayer.

They made it so that it was a localized effect on whatever enemy you had targeted, and IIRC if another player entered the sphere of influence they'd get slowed down as well.

Of course, it meant nothing when most players were using god mode with full-auto LMGs firing grenades.

This.
Games are mostly targeted at americans who are all casuals thus lowering the quality of games for everyone.

>They are fat, they clap, we are jealous they did the whole roman thing better then us
Oy, your like the japs with how you look at us for your problems when they are yours alone.

I'm pretty sure the reason Evolve tanked like it did was because the fucking stupid DLC scheme was talked about even before the game released, which deterred a lot of people. If they kept that quiet and then surprised people with it a few months in, they probably would've pulled more suckers.
Plus, the alpha was pretty shit and you spent most of the time just waiting in lobbies, which personally turned me away from what could've been a fucking mistake of a purchase

DLC + people didn't like the chase styled gameplay. Initial price with only one gamemode on release was also shitty.
Lobbies were pretty fine as far as I remember.

It's a real shame since I actually enjoyed the game but thankfully I predicted it would flop and avoided it.

You forgot the vey.

Evolve should have had a DLC policy like rainbow 6 siege everything is free season pass gots get it 2 weeks early

Recommend me some good games nigger

Gimme some source on that.

i can't wait to see it bomb again.

Nips are the worst group of people.
Sure they are plenty polite and easier to get along with then their cousin the chink.

However they are so amazingly apathetic to their lives and government its disgusting.

japantimes.co.jp/news/2008/01/12/national/hepatitis-c-bill-offering-aid-apology-clears-diet/

They had their own Diet members approve a blood company to operate while many of them owned personal stakes in the company.

Then people got sick and government denied it for 6 years.

Then they admitted it happened, they got some diet members to shed a few tears.

THEN THEY WERE ABSOLVED OF ANY WRONG DOING AND NO ONE WAS VOTED OUT.

They are disgusting people who have no fucking ambition for life, they just want to live and die and allow the government to continually fuck them over.

But you ever ask what the problem with jap is.

ITS THE AMERICAN PIGGU
When before us Samurai would regularly kill peasants for no reason, Jap soldiers could rape anyones daughter or widow.
Children were neglected and left without food as parents chose to keep themselves fed as rice stipends got worse.

Fuck japan, they deserve a third nuke.

what?

Because it's weebshit :^)
But seriously, because it's japanese GTA, it can hardly compete with it especially with a different culture, when there are plenty of GTA clones already that most people would be more inclined to buy, like Saints Row.
And those that want japstuff get Way of the Samurai or Sleeping Dogs instead.

Oh but they gave people objectives. Problem is, they were shit objectives because the first objective the monster has "eat as much as your momma" clashes horribly with the objective the hunters have of "hunt the monster" because both don't mesh well together. One tries to steer players together for a fight while the other does exactly the oposite.

Compare that to stage 3, where the monster has to hunt the hunters while they have to hold out for enough time or kill the monster AND keep some reactor safe. That reactor was specifically so the hunters couldn't just run away from the monster the whole time, that was a neat detail to force a fight at that specific point.
Even Left4Dead Versus has this where Survivors must run through areas with the other Infected players, while those have to slow or stop them completely, ensuring they are always clashing.

Evolve was like playing Chess with someone that started with only half the pieces you do, and instead of playing in his turn, he's rummaging the house for extra pieces while you play.
If he comes back too soon, he's at a disadvantage and loses the game, but if he manages to find all those pieces, he lays them on the board and now that the game starts, he's the one with a massive advantage. It's basically autistic chess.

Yeah, that's a neat game, really. Dunno how hard the snowballing is, compared with similar games (Renegade X, Savage) but I reckon that's mostly Evolve done right.

...

Nice try laddy, but you should've tried harder. I've seen you with your shenanigans before.

Focus groups. Instead of actually being creative and working to make their own things, they instead pay focus groups to tell them what is popular and what to make
Parkour and team based shooters are in! Let's also add in a cash shop and grinding!
E-sports are the hot new thing! Let's make it like L4D but with the tank! How do we make this as flashy and interesting as possible? Since this is sure to be a hit, let's make 20 different DLC packs to maximize profits!
MMOs are pretty popular so is Tom Clancey so why don't we add them together? Game Balance? That can be added in later
Wacky colorful teambased shooter MOBAs are in! I know, let's compete about Blizzard which has an almost indefinite marketing budget

At least Bethesda knew that Battlecry was doomed to fail and shelved the project.

From what I understand, the PC population is just about dead with consoles not too far behind.

consoles will die first.
Next steam aka PC market will crumble.
Then the crash will come.

Do you think its normal that Steam can't even support its servers enough to keep crashes during summer sale?
You think EA and Movies being sold was to add to their library and not supplement it?
You think this summer sale is so awful for a reason?

Less AAA games are being made, there have been more flops that were heavily invested in, in the last few years then any other time in history.

The userbase is more skeptical and cynical even the normalfag casuals.

Its all coming to a close, and a new chapter will begin.

Consumers gonna consum

So basically, if a game doesn't have KING OF CUCKS invokved it will fail for them?

Says who?

Yeah, one of nothing but mobileshit and the biggest of big AAA stuff. The age of middleware is gone.

lowest common denominator

It is Japanese GTA, and the creator hates the GTA series for being better than his.

Do you jerk off with your tears.
There is no evidence of this in the slightest, why after multiple AAA failures would they continue to make more?
EA which used to produce several games a year now sticks to sports game.

Mobiles are popular but now with the exposure of money sinks like candy crush people view most of them unfavorably.

Anyway the problem with the industry are people making games for profit 1st and not wanting to make a game 1st.
There will be those who want to make videogames and as long as there are there will be a market.

Okay, now you're confusing me. I have no idea who you think I am but I'd like a link to "my" comments just to read them too.

I haven't actually played either of those games, but from what I see in the trailers, those are all pretty much GTA clones. Except Sleeping Dogs is better or at least people like it more for some reason (I hear it's the story?) and Way of the Samurai is jap stuff during jap time so it's the jap that keeps japping.

Meanwhile Yakuza is GTA but everyone talks broken english and instead of "muh drugs" it's "muh honour", which is amusing but not a concept mainstream people know or care about.

Reminder that a game needs to either be good or fun for a lot of people to actually sell. And if it didn't sell, then I'm willing to be a lot of people didn't considered it to be particularly good or actually that funny. Or perhaps it simply had too much competition that did the same but better.

I really wish people stopped talking about Battleborn vs Overwatch purely on their marketing budget, as if that alone decides how good or how fun a game is or even how much it can sell.
There are lots of games with incredible amounts of marketing that didn't sold jack shit and others that never had much of a budget to start with and sold a lot.

Overwatch is fairly mediocre for the kind of game it is but at least it does a fair job at being fun. And it's not particularly bad either.
Meanwhile Battleborn isn't fun and it's not even good at whatever it wants to be. It's not a good shooter, it's not a good MOBA, it's not a good thing.

Marketing is literally the lesser problem when it comes to Overwatch vs Battleborn.

Well now you're just lying. You wanna know why Yakuza doesn't sell in the west? Because people don't even know it fucking exists. Other than that huge problem they fucked the localization of 3 and finding copies of any of these games is almost fucking impossible if you don't want to pay out the ass for used PS2 and PS3 games. Also the only one that is easy to get due to being digital only is the fifth game in the series and nobody wants to start a story heavy game at the fucking fifth installment.

Last I checked, nobody in that group just says "sex sells". If anything, they seem to think of it as more annoying, than anything else, as it only serves to get their attention, with the product in question only being of slight interest.

You think monkey can do this. Don't you? Like advertising, shilling is some kind of simple task? You're taking all this "LCD" crap, and running with it, like the presentation is all that matters.

You're selling an experience, and unless sex is a part of that, it's not everything.

For the average consumer yeah pretty much. Or do you actually think the average normalfag does research on what they buy and doesn't just see a commercial and say "Aww shit I gotta go get me that new Calla Duty!"

Yakuza has nothing to do with GTA, the games are in completely different genres altogether. GTA is a sandbox third person shooter with cars while Yakuza is a JRPG 3D Brawler. The only thing they have in common is that they revolve around crime but even then they take crime in completely different directions.

Yakuza is the spiritual sequel to Shenmue which released 2 years before GTA 3. Saying that Yakuza is a GTA clone is fucking retarded and proof that you never played the game.

So if the statement still is true, then GTA 3 is a Shenmue clone. Yakuza still wins. Take that, Rockstar!

I think the biggest problem with Yakuza these days, aside from the absolute lack of marketing, is that it's too "video gamey". Kids these days only want realistic games for mature people such as themselves.

Something that the usual Holla Forumsirgin doesn't consider is that the normalfag does not neet waifus for sex. He has a girlfriend IRL and so waifubait is not a selling point for him.
They don't fap to sex scenes, they laugh at them if they are short and they groan if they are too long.
Consider as well that they often play with friends (it's a social thing for them) and seeing sex scenes or erotic characters with friends is as appealing as watching porno movies together. As in, you have to be gay to do that shit

What they also don't consider is the level of psychology involved in marketing. It's ridiculous the amount of tricks and knowledge needed to actually make a decent plan to trick people and it's a bit insulting for them that some basement tard actually thinks he can understand it that easily. A proper skinner's box doesn't even look like one but works 200% like one. A big branch in marketing is all about creating an obscene Skinner's box that drains huge amounts of money, reliably for a vast amount of time and actively works to convince you it's not a skinner's box at all.

What the fuck do you think TF2 is, for instance? It picked the concept of "skill-based gameplay" with rocket\sticky-jumping and lumped it together side-by-side with cosmetics. The more you practice your "skill" (and I fully acknowledge there's a lot of skill involved here, actually) the longer you are exposed to other players wearing cosmetics and basically advertizing for Valve. Except they even payed to do so.
The more you try to improve, the more "ads" you see. And the more you try to contribute to the community, the bigger the skinner's box gets. More maps and cosmetics are added by fans that keep the game alive, ensuring people keep playing the game and having yet another day to buy stuff.

And you think that lootcrates were the worst, didn't you?

GTA San Andreas is also a RPG with stats and brawling :^)

sure thing buddy.

Well fuck kids if we just made games that kids liked all games would be fucking minecraft and call of duty.

People don't even know it fucking exists, because the producers don't want to advertise it here. Why is that? Because they see GTA as dominant, because of the vice the series allots to the player, in comparison to theirs. This, and their constant fellating of their local mafia basically makes it a Japan-thing.

This is why you aren't working with Activision. That, and you aren't Jewish.

They know what their customer really thinks, and despite how much you and I both hate the series, it's meat and potatoes. That's what sells.

This "audience" of theirs don't think much of video games, this is why they're "casuals". They have money, though, and they see CoD as a simple thing for them to enjoy.

This is not the village idiot buying your games, but the village itself, barring the few stuck-up types who you shouldn't bother selling to, in the first place. That's you. That's me. All they have to do to make money is just say they're making another. The buyers will think their last experience was nice, and will want that again. The best part is that Bobby doesn't have to care about how much money he wastes advertising it. He'll make a massive profit, either way.

Japan's worse on the casual meter.

If that were true everyone wouldn't hate the new COD.

By kids I mean the general public.

This Japan has produced nothing but cancer for years.

Fuck the general public they don't fucking buy anything other than COD and FIFA why does anyone but EA or Activision care what they think?

Because the people who make the decisions behind these game studios are businessmen whose only concern is how big of a paycheck he's going to take home at the end of the month. They don't care what you and I think, they just want money. They are not going to invest millions in a marketing campaign for a game that they know is not popular with the general public, they will still develop it for the niche market but all the marketing money goes to popular shitty games to sell to the general public which consists of children and manchildren.

It's the easiest point to make since almost no one has played Battleborn.

And those games they blew all their marketing money on don't sell because those games aren't COD or FIFA so why do they keep doing something that doesn't make them money?

This is a key to understanding the true lowest common denominator. Most types here seem to think that normalfags are just them, but stupid. In the end, this is why developers want you to die. It's because you're resisting. You don't want games to be a business, when that's all they want, because they want to make a good profit, so they can meet their expanding needs to make a good profit. That's all they want.

That's because, like all things, it's getting old. You can sell discs, and you can sell bean bags, but you can't sell them, for long.

This is where Activision's conundrum comes from; the search for more money.

So they're just fucking retarded and that is why they constantly make bad decisions?

Are you sure it doesn't make them money? Also, you should ask them, not me.

In the end, they're no different from their audience, user.

Brink wasn't a bad game, it just had a bad launch and not enough good maps.

Quite sure as you can look up how many people are playing these multiplayer games they keep pushing on us and there is no way the thousand something people playing these games gave them enough money to pay back the millions lost in marketing a turd.

people playing the game =/ people who bought the game

People don't buy games to not play them user. At least not in numbers that matter.

What I'm saying is that the number of people playing the game now is not representative of the number of people who bought the game.

It is when you look at these games the first week they come out. Overall I have not been impressed.

I was being sarcastic there but if you want to take this more seriously, you do play a role in San Andreas with a character and you have an entire story unfolding around you due to the choices your character makes.
Can't get more RPG than this, unless Yakuza gave you multiple choices to make that severely changed how the game and story played out.

Touché.

Except they knew very well what reaction they were gonna get.
This was a calculated move, trying to expand the market since they already got everyone else. The previous iteractions were already quasi-futuristic, just not full cyber-stuff yet.
The community hated the trailer, not the game and they are still gonna buy it because they buy it to play with their friends, not because they actually apreciate the game itself, much like you don't see bad movies unless you're going with friends.

Activision knows fully well their "core gamers" are still gonna buy it but now other people that hate militaristic shooters might be drawn into it because "it has all them robits and cybrogs and stuff!"
It's just a dealer changing the business from heroine to cocaine. The junkies will stay no matter what they say.

That's not true at all, especially for multiplayer games.
Team Fortress had a peak of about 70.000 players or something, however the number of people that bought it is far bigger than that.
If you see 1000 people on the first week and 1000 people on the second week, you might think that only 1000 people bought the game.
But if the second 1000 were all different players, it's actually 2000 that bought it, the first 1000 just dropped it in a week.

Besides, the point of those games isn't even to actually make money. It's market probing. All of them tend to be new IPs or new game genres for an existing IP. It's basically the company throwing literal shit at the wall and seeing what sticks. They have their CoDs and their FIFAs to make money and sustain them, they can waste a few bucks in testing the waters and seeing what people want now. And if they find something that people actually like, they make sequels and expansions and DLCs for that. What the fuck do you think Borderlands was, for instance? Just a probe that sucessfully called home, that's it.

The Division is dead but tons of fucking people bought that game so they already have the money.

The upcoming DLC will probably sell quite a few copies as well

The Division is casual fodder at it's finest. It was good enough for faggots to get invested in for a short period of time allowing them to ultimately have a decent experience with the game. But also shitty enough that there can be massive improvements made to the game, which means many will return for the inevitable sequel.

I thought the game was utter trash, but casuals love it, and really that's all that is important because you can sell a lot of copies

I think it's gearbox's fault that it flopped, although not just in the "they made a shit game" way
Before it came out they twitted at overwatch some cocky shit like "come at us" and blizzard had the open beta the week battleborn launched
If it had come out without that open beta maybe more people would've bought it and wouldn't feel like spending money on overwatch
But they teased blizzard and got fucked over by that open beta
This doesn't make the game good in any way but it did accelerate its demise

Because that would be mysoginist.

Go to any marketing course and one of the first things you'll hear that there exists no better way to catch a person's attention that a naked, or at least semi-naked woman. It's instinctual. Men see them as a possible partner for sex and thus divert their attention to them, while women see them as potential rivals, also directing attention to them. This kind of advertisement is so effective that it's actually illegal in some countries to put naked or semi-naked women into ads unless you can prove that it closely relates to your product

Shes apparently the Wraith in human form

and here it is talk.turtlerockstudios.com/t/title-update-9-everything-we-know-expected-summer-2016/82771

Evolve might be going F2P in the future from what people speculate

Ahem.

What manner of heresy is this?

More like WraithxKraken in human form

Yes. It's happened since the first Summer Sale because Valve refuses to properly maintain their servers or curate their store. It's cheaper to let it crash and stall then to pay for extra manpower.

If it makes you feel any better almost everytime a Hunter talks to her they all hate her hell the bugman hates her the most.

What game were you playing because I certainly did not see any choices you can make that would affect the story in a big way.

Unless you're referring to the character as in CJ making his own scripted choice, which still seperates it really far from an RPG.

She looks like Turok's evil little sister.

...

Threadly reminder that Wraithporn ruined the bacterial marketing of Evolve. The companies doing the chan marketing didn't want to be associated with the porn, got cold feet and stopped shilling it so hard.

what is overwatch

The guy marketing Evolve came clean and told the whole story. Actiblizzard are not pleased by the heavy association their game has with porn.

Please quit forcing this dumb meme, it isn't true in the slightest.

As much as a chan would like to believe it has the power to stop marketing and kill games, that's not really what happened.
Thinking that the porn is what killed the marketing is like finding a stranded whale in the beach, poke it with a stick and claim you killed it.

There was plenty wrong with the game already, no marketing could have saved it. If anything, defending the game (marketing or not) was seen as incredibly pathetic since anyone could see the game was shit and would die.

I meant the choices CJ did, but I also acknowledged that that's not all there is to an RPG. However, unless Yakuza had choices the player, not the character, had to make that impacted the story, Yakuza was as much of an RPG as San Andreas was.

And if we are gonna be pedantic here, I might as well mention all the girlfriends and businesses you can own in GTA as each often actually have their little story involved there and are optional choices.

you forgot titanfall.

They were about to finally pander towards people's filthy desires for the Wraith, after resisting for so long, but then they realised that they can't just pander to people who wanted that, in the first place. They've got to pander to muslims, and feminists, too!

They can't even sell sex, when it jumps on their plate, because of their "principals". Fucking Turtle-Cuck.

...

I don't know man, some faggots love bureaucracy simulators.

People like being the bureaucrat, rather than working with them.

Case in point; Papers Please.

I say it every Evolve thread.

Noob day one-ers versus the guy who's done nothing but play monster for 2 weeks = noobs run away pissed off because Kraken or anything beyond it OWNS fresh characters.

Why does she have such a man face?

What planet are you living on, user? The game sold shitloads of units and rakes in tons of dosh through its MTX store. It also regularly releases free and paid DLC packs that sell like crazy.

Compared to the Division, that's been bleeding users users on Steam since it launched, it's going extremely healthily.

They really, really hated it when people started fetishising the Wraith.

Her designer, however, took it as more of a compliment, than anything else.

Oh sure, it totally wasn't just him pushing for a giant sexy ayylmao or anything.

Gave the game something to be remembered for at least.

Notice how he said "there was a discussion" about "making something slightly unsettling about her", which somehow lead to her becoming that.

How do you think he got that to happen?

I dont know why

but I always liked the look of Evolve

...

To Push an agenda
EA has enough good goy point to last for years

It's HUEG, so you probably like 40k, as well.

I actually went back it.

Its "alright" 2k fucked up hardcore though I wonder if the game really will go F2P since some giant overhaul is gonna happen.

I had forgotten that faggot, I wonder how he feels now alone on his server.

Because western devs can't into femininity for shit.

It's practically confirmed it's going f2p.

They can, but they're taught otherwise.

Shit how did you know I love 40k.

Evolve aside from wraithful had some pretty cool designs

Because I dislike the design of both this game and 40k. Too much popcorn.

Don't mind the Wraith, though. Don't mind her, at all.

Popcorn?

Extremity. Too much crashing and big guys. Lot of words, for ADD-bait.

Welcome to the west I guess

I don't think you understand, user.

There's Rambo, and then there's that. Big goofy steel fists are the moniker of too much popcorn.

I dunno I just like crazy fun things

Not even Battletech is on that level of silliness, user. At least they have some semblance of practicality.

Okay how about Combat Fire fighters

Also cmon have you seen the fucking Urbie

Who is this altracity daemon?

Nice idea, but HUEG.

just like every country in this god forsaken world

I got this comic from the 80s

The "decade of excess"? What else is surprising?

Evolve having a playerbase

HEYO

It's not like this is new. See Species as he mentioned, or freaking Alien, which is basically a giant penis rape monster that was originally meant to have massive genitals.

That's the thing, user. IT DOESN'T

HAHAHAhave a frame from an incomplete lewd gif posted in one of the old threads that will probably never ever be completed

This is some next level heresy.

the voice acting in evolve is kinda off.

Imagine Matt mercers voice from this guy

I wonder if the artist still lurks around here.

I asked recently how Bethesda went from being the company that 20 years ago were finishing up Daggerfall to becoming the company that made Skyrim and Fallout 4. The answer is money.

I'm starting to think Todd just slammed his head in a sold gold door frame or something. Even with the broken, half-assed gameplay mechanics and dialog writing, Elder Scrolls Online somehow was better than Skyrim.

I wonder if anyone is going to post more SFM Wraith porn.

There's next to none; as far as I know, most of it has already been posted.

...

Nice. A version of that one that isn't 23 MegaBytes.

Have another rare.

Isn't Muslim half monster redundant?

The design looks like some angsty weeb's half-demon OC donut steel from early 2000's deviantArt.

That's stupid, why would you try to pander with something people want to fuck with two other things absolutely* no one wants to fuck? That's not how pandering works. Then again, I can see how it was probably easier to pander to three different groups by rolling all the subhumans into one character.

Beta orbiters do not count as people either, therefore the above does not apply to them.

Except the second will get pissed, the third won't give a fuck, and now the first is pissed, too.

In the end, I consider it nothing more than a total and complete waste of time, energy and money,

Really sad that we can't have scarfs over head anymore because "muh muslims". Reminder that there's persians and egyptians too that can use that aesthetic BTW, not to mention how practical it actually is.
And in all honesty, it reminds me more of small rural towns in some european countrys that muslims yes, I know the irony here… since most elder women here wear something similar to that.

Also that update…
Dome for every hunter? Seriously? That's their "plan" to fix the Flee Till Stage 3?
For fuck sake's that even an official term for that, FT3. That's how bad the problem is.

All that shit does is make the monster avoid fights even more. The dome ensures that any hit&run tactic never reach the "run" part, so you either fight while you are purposely at a disadvantage and end the game faster like a noob, or you try your best to never allow them to dome you in.
Giving the dome to every hunter just means that instead of avoiding the Trapper and sometimes try to get the other characters if they strayed off, now the monster can't possibly go after absolutely nobody until he is at Stage 3, or risk being trapped when he's at his weakest point.

Fuck, are they really that retarded?

They took the running simulator meme to heart.

Seriously the game would be solid if they let players control the wildlife. Also look at the change at how hunters will have health regen making most medic obsolete and that one medic who can only revive be super OP.

shit devs and shit publisher

The funny thing is, those 2 changes most likely came from people bitching at their Trappers and Medics that they weren't going a good enough job.

The people that don't play Trapper or Medic actually made those classes irrelevant in the game, all because of "toxicity" because those are the kind of people that play Evolve and those are the kind of people these Devs are gonna pander too.

We will see how the game will. Oddly enough evolve is fun if you have a LAN party going.

Woah. Did Chris Metzen take a drawing lesson or something?

Come on, look at the loins, user!

Shit got old real fast when every game as hunters is "desperately try to find the monster before stage 3 or you lose" and every game as the monster is the opposite. Also, balance was god awful: fuck that medic who made killing hunters pointless.

They added an Arena mode but that was proven shit since every monster player went kraken.

Trust me, I feel the same way about dyed hair.
Thing is, they never divorce headscarves from Islam. Since they're about as subtle as a monster truck with a screaming clown strapped to it's hood, when they make muslim characters they always have a headscarf because it's such an easy shorthand for it. It's like if they made all the atheistic and agnostic characters wear fedoras no matter what setting.

We always talk about wraith but what about the hunterfus? Like Val,Caria and Sunny

Who?

Dyed hair a shit, though.

The chemicals from it fuck with your head.

I dont think most would care

It's no wonder people found themselves more attracted to the Wraith, with those ugly mugs to stare at.

At least they got creative, with her original model(, which I've spoilered, for shocking content). Not much to say, for the others.

They have 3 main problems that are killing them

1) Shit talent and poor organization. Their writer is horrible at what they do. Just look at how many times Fallout 4 contradicts what a Synth is. The prime reaction in the trailer for Far Harbor was "Not more Synths! FUCK!". Their teams don't intercommunicate at all so you get massively lopsided content.

They also seemed to have a leftist writer who got terminated at some point during the development of Far Harbor.

Solution is simple, from a design standpoint you come up with core elements and defined concepts. For example: Radiation storms and their effects on the environments. Everything must be built to match this world feature. The world must show the effects of this feature.

Any team that creates low quality quests is terminated with the valuable employees shifted to other teams.

2) Corporate is killing them. Bethesda CEO was the primary reason Fallout 4 had some much feminist muh women bullshit. His wife was the female voice actor.

I'll wage money so many of the devs ideas were neutered in favor of corporates ideas. Look at the rewrites and it's obvious.

3) They're not the only game in town anymore. Bethesda used to be great because they had no competition to speak of. Morrowind had maybe 2 other games that it competed with of the same genre. Oblivion had some but none that reached the scope it achieved.

Now you're beating open world games back with a stick and they're becoming more and more competent, more and more fun, and Bethesda is dumbing down their products.

Fallout 4 failed. It's reviled by a large part of the silent majority. It's sales are lower than Fallout New Vegas and more people play Skyrim. Most who bought the season pass are not touching the content. I'm talking over 93% of people and in some areas 94-5%.

Somethings going to have to change in Bethesda. Doom failed, ESO failed, Battleborn Failed. Their corporate arm has no idea what they're doing anymore. They're hitting a wall probably because they can't get too many third party companies to work with them anymore after what they pulled with Human Head and Arkane Studios.

They have a lot of reserves, but they're going to burn though them quickly if writing and gameplay don't pick up in their games. Prey looks like it'll do well along with Dishonored 2, but everything else they have looks like it will bomb.

I did not think she was that buff Jesus

That's fucking disgusting.

Serious bugs on release and an average rework of the free W:ET made it seem unfitting for the price. Image tainted by initial reviews and impressions, the game became something undesired and ignored past the market window. It's not bad, just underwhelming considering the cost.

Tried monetizing a great deal of the game, anticipating demand would push through costs. Though much of the content was cosmetic or unlocked through regular play, the nickle-and-dime play set a negative image of the game and developer, making potential customers reject Turtlerock on principle.

Big install base magnified MMO launch pains, fed into an established cascade of Ubisoft schadenfreude. Major financial success - so very different from the others (though Battleborn sales are speculative) - but MMOs are judged by stricter criteria than other games. Will probably be better off in a year or two; see: FF14.

Got sniped by a bigger developer with bigger marketing pockets, and set an unusually high price point. Whether Gearbox didn't think to fight it or gave up in seeing the size of their opponent is debatable, but the difference in marketing made Battleborn appear to be a derivative of Overwatch.

It's not unusual in the game industry for key figures to leave after the project is complete. Squenix offered Barnard a salary above what Ubisoft was willing to pay, and got him to lead IO. Barnard's made a name for himself with Division's detailed level design, which is likely the reason Squenix wanted him for Hitman.

That would be a really good break. There's enough microtransaction content that you could get $15-40 mean per player, and being F2P means people won't be discouraged by initial price before trying the game.

...

Brink, Evolve, and Battleborn all have one thing in common.

Bullshit DLC.

They have two more things in common, as well; a malfunctioning playerbase, and wasted potential.

I was gonna say waifu potential as well, but I'm not 100% about Brink and Battleborn.

No. The Wraith is pretty much unique to Evolve, in that regard, so look no further.

"Booby", uh?

Silly buzzwords. What you mean is 'I think I could have done better', and that's an easy thing to say when you can ignore all the details while braincracking on "potential".

Yes. Booby.

No, that's an accurate term.
You can say a game has "wasted potential" when you can see how a few changes would easily make the game actually good, especially when a random faggot can think of those changes in 15 minutes or less.

Battleborn would be fairly decent with a cheaper price and more units to the point you'd think you booted Dynasty Warriors.
Also, give currency for killing players or taking points, not farming tiny crystals and dodge combat.

Evolve would be a decent game if other players controlled more wildlife, hunters had other objectives until Stage 3 and the monster evolved with damage done and respawned instead of playing "American Dream" until Stage 3.

See: "when you can ignore all the details". 'That should have been like this' without understanding why that was made the way it was.

Battleborn would have been better with a lower price, but how could Gearbox have known the gap between expected and actual demand until days after the game was released? If Evolve was changed the way you propose, wouldn't the hunters play "American Dream", while monster respawning nullified the central objective of the game?

You can easily hypothesize afterwards or with doing lazy-think of 'I would like it better if it was my way', but that's inapplicable. If the game doesn't work, stop there instead of trying to say you're better than the developer for a half-baked hindsight.

Why is she holding him like that?

I thought that was the author's signature.

Dunno, mate.
Maybe have an Open Beta for it and see how many people try the game and how the amount of players changes during a whole week? :^)
Maybe looking at the amount of competition and seeing that +20$ over other games in the genre (and some were even free) is not a good idea at all?
Maybe considering who exactly are they marketing towards and realizing it's never gonna appeal to MOBA fans and it's too detached from class based shooters for that audience too?
Gee, I simply can't see a single sign here that heralds the doom of that game…

See Left4Dead for this, I guess? Survivors have the objective to leave the level and Zombies have the objective to stop them. Despite the respawning nature of Zombies, it doesn't nullify the point of the game and it doesn't just allow the Survivors to run straight for the end either.

Having hunters with objectives like "Hunt 20 Albino Bugs" or "Find and Exfiltrate 25 Civilians from that area" that they have to do while the monster constantly attacks them.
If they complete their Objective, they win the round. If the Monster manages to evolve to Stage 3 before that happens, the objective becomes "hunt the monster".
Since in the first 2 stages he respawns, he can be weaker than 4 hunters together and it's still an interesting fight since he's not supposed to survive, just cause as much damage as possible.
But since Stage 3 is a final fight, he does not need to be stronger than a stack of 4 hunters as he currently is, he can just be in equal footing.

There, solved the "Flee Till Stage 3" problem, the "run around looking for a sneaky monster" problem and the "fights at stage 1 and 3 are always unbalanced to one side" as well as the "fights at stage 2 don't happen because it's pointless"

It's called history, user. There's games that have been done before with this concept that worked in a specific okay. Key word: worked.
They are picking a concept and doing it in a way that simply cannot work and anyone can see it. They are quite simply failing to learn with history.

Giants: Citizen Kabuto worked because there wasn't a single faction fighting the Kabuto, there were 2 keeping each other busy until Kabuto showed up. And he could easily engage in combat much before the last stage as long as he picked his fights carefully. Which was possible since not everyone was busy fighting him.
And even then, he did respawned since the goal in the game was getting a set amount of kills, not just killing him.

Left4Dead worked with the tank because until you find him, there's several zombies and specials to fight and keep the survivors busy. And the point of the game wasn't "walk through this long hallways where nothing is gonna bother you so you can fight the tank in the end" as well as the tank never having a stage where he was weaker than the hunters team and the game could end in an unsatisfactory way much shorter just because the tank was shit at running way. Also, the tank didn't run away like a bitch.

He fainted from the touch of the monster.

Look closer, user. It's a pointer.

He seems conscious, he's smiling after all.

He's actually just being all shy and stuff.

What's a bashful man doing with a giant beast?

Nobody actually faints from romantic encounters, unless they're already under heavy duress. He's feigning fainting so she can get her big mitts all over him.

How would you know that?

Might as well ask her that.

Battleborn had an open beta, their competition until a year before release was SMNC and possibly Smite. Things were looking good until Blizzard out-marketed Gearbox, which there's no solution to.

Guess who made L4D. L4D works because there are two teams of four taking turns then comparing their time (or distance) to determine a winner, and the infected are expected to die over and over. If the goal of Evolve is to kill the monster, you can't direct players away from that. If killing the monster isn't the goal, why the fuck does the game exist?

Both games you've drawn inspiration from are about 'one versus many', and the concepts you speak of (pick fights, problems until big fight) exist in Evolve from the 'one versus many' perspective of the monster (S1/S2 isolate and scrap, hunters hound you until you wreck the MacGuffin).

If they had an open beta, then there's no excuse for over-pricing their game. They fully knew how many players they could expect.
SMNC was never competition for anyone and Smite is not the same type of game. As in, Smite is what Battleborn wanted to be but never managed to.

Stop it right there, let's not go any further before we clear this up.
Battleborn and Overwatch have a very large amount of differences between each other with marketing being just one one of them. They aren't carbon copies of each other, as many like to claim, and this wasn't simple a case of "what became the brand and what become the alternative".
If Battleborn failed to attract as much attention to itself it's because it wasn't as interesting as Overwatch did. Take streamers as an example since they are a crucial part of marketing.
Streamers did not have much interest in streaming the game because they did not believe this would be interesting at all for their viewers. The game had no merit for them and was a poorer alternative to Overwatch.

Saying that marketing was the biggest factor that contributed to it's downfall is completely ignoring just how terrible the gameplay and the characters were as well as how butchered the whole concept was. You simply can't make a MOBA with just 3 items and you can't make a shooter that rewards you for fucking off and farming instead of shooting at other people.
This was much more important in it's downfall than marketing.

It works because both Infected and Survivors have each a goal that forces them to engage in fights with each other, while Evolve only sees the same thing at stage 3. During stage 1 and 2, the Monster goal is to avoid fighting wish clashes with the Hunters goal. This is a very basic concept to understand, you're not gonna tell me it's "hindsight wisdom" because anyone could see this coming.

Ever consider that maybe the problem then is the goal? That the goal is the same throughout the whole match but the difficulty or chalenge to reach it is not the same throughout the whole match?

What's the actual point in fighting at stage 1 or 2, when the monster is weaker than the players? It's an easy fight that lasts as long as he can survive or for the duration of the Dome, he doesn't have enough HP to outlast the hunters or damage to compete against them. It's a shitty goal that doesn't acomplish nothing and isn't even hard, provided you can find the monster, the most boring part of the game.

If completing another objective before the monster can evolve was the goal, there'd be a chalenge that's not meaningless and it can be well balanced around. And you still keep the Stage 3 but it no longer needs to be tipped in favour of the monter.

No longer gonna happen. New update gives the Dome to every hunter. That's how well that strategy worked before…
The game could be reduced to Stage 3 and lose nothing in terms of substance and fun. Stages 1 and 2 are fillers so the game can try to justify itself and last a bit longer, but they aren't fun for anyone but the monster because they were badly thoughout and the goals of both teams don't make sense together.

I have a somewhat first-hand knowledge of these things.

What? How?

How can you suddenly seek these threads out so quickly?

Oh, come on. It took me two days to find that one.

That doesn't matter, when so much as a single conversation about those voluptuous hips seems to awaken you.

Almost as if you have some kind of precognitive sense for this sort of discussion, on this specific board, at this lone site.

These games are like the little hollywood movies they shit out into theaters in the intervening months between the big releases.

Except they're the main stream, for some reason.

Impressive.

Ah, my naive little friend. The entire world is rife with corruption and wrong doers.

More. I want more of her.

Draw more of her. Continue.

What's going on in that image?
Is he drunk or just tired?
Nice work, by the way

That is literally what marketing is about - generating interest. When people say they 'bought into the marketing hype' that's exactly what they're saying: marketing made the game appear more interesting than it actually was. Powerful marketing creates an interest cascade where consumers look to mavens for information, and mavens prioritize the marketed thing over other things, which makes more consumers interested in the thing - streamers and viewers, de facto.

The Infected want to fight the Survivors, but the Survivors only want to make it to the finish. L4D versus is about running away from the Infected and only fighting when running would be a greater loss, which means three Survivors in a safe room will gladly leave a lagging fourth to die.

Monster receives health back when going 1-2 and 2-3, so trading health for a downed hunter is a net win in the long game. Also, hunters during S3 will clump up around the objective, yet stay spread out during S1 and S2.

That's just MOBA problems: the more people who need to work together, the faster they'll hate each other when things go wrong. If a hunter is terrible or ragequits, the other three are dragged through a losing match until the monster finishes. If the monster is terrible or ragequits, the game is over and everybody can move on. Same thing happens in L4D with shitty teammates. Perhaps the problem is that Evolve doesn't communicate the objective well enough, or needs to group players by skill?

He fainted, from the sight of her, and she immediately assumes nursing position, by holding him against her bosom.

Basically, what I thought the other image was, until he corrected me, and proceeded to draw exactly what I saw, in his vision.

Based CrowbCat

This actually made me laguh. Pervy spidy

She's a big girl.

Both made tons of dosh.

Fun fact: Diablo 3 is the #10 best selling game of all time wedged between New Super Mario Bros DS (#9) and New Super Mario Bros Wii (#11)

...

Diablo3 was fueled by D2. If it was named anything else, it wouldn't sell as much.

It was fucking hilarious seeing the developers of D3 all salty about comments made by the guy behind D1 and 2. Then they shittalk him for his recent creations while patting each other on the back for making a best-selling game even though it was clear their success just leeched off his legacy.

A shame shit like that doesn't happen, anymore. Publishers learned from that, and their "fuck gamers" attitude basically lets them reboot and fuck everything up with pride in their eyes, and money in their bags. Bastards.

Marketing generates hype and gets people to try your game. But it's the actual game that keeps people playing it. Both games had an Open Beta but one managed to keep it's players and even more after that. You can argue all you want about the marvelous effects of marketing but none of that actually excuses the game.
Battleborn could have been released with no Overwatch in the market and it still wouldn't sell at all.

Consider the following: if Battleborn had the same budget Overwatch had for marketing… Who would it market itself to?
The inventory, the skills and the farm are way too simple for MOBA fans. It's like HotS was EVEN simpler than it already is.
But at the same time, the leveling up mechanic and the farm put away FPS fans that will see this meaning fights can often start without equal footing for all players.

There's absolutely nobody to market the game to. The game was built in a way that it never had a playerbase or a target audience even before it was released, the name Stillborn perfectly describes it.
Don't excuse the game with "if only they had a few more shekels for advertizement…" because the game was already fucking terrible and nobody would buy it even if it was free.

If he reaches those stages. Which might not happen since S1 and S2 see the monster being weaker than the 4 hunters working together. At best he gets a downed Hunter at the risk of losing the game. Say this again loud enough that you actually understand the full meaning of this strategy: he can risk the whole game for a single downed Hunter. Oh and they respawn after a while anyway, big benefit to the Monster in the "long game"…

Except when one sees you and pings your location, summoning all the other hunters, often without a single warning to you. And considering how the new update is trying to solve the FT3 with "dome for everyone!" attacking a single hunter just means falling in his dome until his friends can arrive, completely invalidating a strategy that already only worked against uncoordinated teams.

No. The reliance on teamwork is a problem on it's own but has nothing to do with this. It's still there on top of this problem and is exagerated because of this problem but it's not this problem at all.

Everytime you play Hunter, there's a huge pressure on you to find the monster as fast as possible before he hits S3. You don't have time to look at the beautifull scenery or hunt the other animals, it's run run run the whole time. And on top of that, you gotta stick with your team or risk facing the monster alone and being killed because of your own incompetence.
But there's nothing fun or exciting about this. It's literally just run around and jetpack on top of things. You don't get to shoot regular animals since that's a waste of time and allows the monster to evolve, you don't get to collect supplies either. It's tedious and boring for the Hunters.

Meanwhile the Monster has a fair amount of pressure in him to not be found which could result in a crappy game and it's not much different. He has to stop for a meal every now and then to give the hunters a chance at finding him, but it's not that hard to do it in a way you aren't found, just gotta take it slow which further exacerbates the Hunters problem.
If he fights before, all his achievements are temporary at best and a gameover at worst, if he engages them later, it's an imbalanced fight in his favour.

There's NOTHING in the game design for Evolve that actually makes it work. Everything works against everything else and all elements clash and break other elements. Hunters respawning ruin early ganks by the Monster, Monster not respawning ruin his agressiveness, a good Monster is one that drags S1 and S2 so he can safely eat, a good Hunter ends the game in a few minutes.

The entire concept of the game is "ideas guy" tier. It looks phenomenal on paper but it's utterly stupid in practice.
You wanna know what the game really is? A timed escort mission where you can't even see your escort. You are timed by the monster feeding and he's the one you gotta "escort". This should tell you just why the game is bad. Just be happy they never made sea monsters for the whole cliche.

Do you think Wraith is a sub or a dom, and top or bottom?
Yes, you can have submissive tops and dominant bottoms.

Shooter fans looking for persistence/progress rewards and strong roles.

At 75/50% of their original health, with following deaths making them un-revivable . Kill one hunter every stage, and the hunters are at 10% weaker if the deaths were different hunters, with a greater advantage if the deaths were on the same hunter. That's the long game.

Monster isn't keeping track of where the hunters are? Sounds like the monster just sucks.

So what are the problems? 'Beautiful scenery which is ignored by hunters because of a pressing objective': well gee I guess the game should remove objectives so people aren't in competitive situations in a competitive game. 'Swing in power means there isn't constant equality': if players aren't capitalizing on their advantage window when it exists, they suck. 'Game has literally nothing that works': sure fam.

You bitch about "idea guys" in critiquing the game, but are eager to describe how your ideas should be used instead. Either accept that your ideas are as worthless as the majority, or require that ideas must perform well before they can be called good.

I think it's a lot more complicated than that, since she's basically an animal. Only a matter of who takes charge.
The only people who think like that are loadbearing gaylords.

I played that multiplayer with a few friends, it was great but with two major problems:
Everything was clientside. Me and some tech fags did some extensive testing. It fucked with gameplay so hard.
The other problem was the balancing. We all eventually ended up using a pistol in one hand because for some reason it was able to outrank a fucking assault rifle at range.
These things turned me off a little but other than that everything else about it was pretty good. And I could play as Max Payne's version of BOPE.

And they'd find none because all your progress is reset when the match ends, it doesn't last for 70-80 hours of your play time like Borderlands fans would expect.
This argument makes as much sense as thinking that MMO fans would love MOBAs since they are the same over the span of 20 minutes instead of 3 months.

Do you even think about these things before you post them?

Do you work for Turtlerock, mate? Because you're quick to dismiss any idea that's different from the current game and you cherrypick or misrepresent what I say as well.
You still haven't explained why besides "they are different from the game and the game is literally perfect". Rationalize your purchase all you want, doesn't change the merit of the game.

It's a simple problem, really. in L4D both the Zombies and the Survivors goals force them to fight all the time. Sure, Survivors just have to run away, but they have a linear path that they must go through and Zombies can exploit this to force a fight.
Meanwhile, in Evolve, the Monster has to avoid fights in S1 and S2. The gains he can get from early engagement simply aren't good enough to justify throwing the whole game. You can talk about "long game benefits" all you want, but if he doesn't get there, there's no benefits to be won.

Any idea that makes the Monster fight the hunters instead of running away from them until he's an unbalanced mess is better than the current game.
Any idea that makes the Hunters do something more interesting than running around during S1 and S2 is better than the boring mess the current game is.

Make the monster respawn and have him evolve based on how much damage he caused in his last life. It forces the Monster to actually fight and mitigating damage becomes much more important against him.

Make the Hunters have to complete certain objectives in fixed locations in the map (by any order they want) so the Monster can find the Hunters easily. If they have to repair a piece of machinery for some time, that's 30 seconds grounded to a single location that the monster can exploit. If they have to escort civilians from A to B, that's a path the Monster can exploit.

Any of this is better than "run run jetpack run" or "hide hide, feed, hide, murder".

Jesus H Christ, why would any Dev ever do that shit?
The benefit in terms of latency is minimal at best and unbalanced for players at worst. The only thing it does is allowing hackers way too much freedom to do whatever they want, no wonder the other poster was complaining about GodMode people.

Probably her, considering she's several times larger than the average human male.

...

was listing to exit music for a film while watching the video and it went together perfectly. Thanks for the top kek friendo.

Not when you take centuries of technology and strategics into account.

After all, it is just another animal.

It's funny, you know, they did clientside hit detection on Planetside 1, which was an MMOFPS from more than a decade ago. You needed that mode of hit detection because there would be 300 people firing at eachother in the same general area.

We are really going backwards.

Christ, I didn't realize how completely identical some of the heroes between BB and OW were.

What the hell happened there, lads? Does Blizz and GBX have spies in each other's companies?

It's like when Hollywood releases two of the exact same movie at the same time. (Like Bug's Life / Antz, White House Down / Olympus Has Fallen, etc.)

I'm assuming the average person in unarmed.

PS1 was over 13 years ago, user. Internet connectivity and server quality has improved.

And do you have any idea what a huge, unsecured clusterfuck it is to have client side hit detection? Look at GTA:O if you need any further evidence that dedicated servers should be damn near mandatory for games like that.

Yeah, that's what I'm saying.

I remember seeing those cellfactor trailers that were kind of tech demos for the Aegia PhysX cards. If you haven't seen it, it was an FPS where hundreds of physics objects were moving at a time, and you had all sorts of abilities to push, pull, manipulate, and so on.

Crazy shit like that is what I was expecting from the future, but instead we get fucking nothing, as AAA development is lazy as all hell.

Clientside hit detection ain't so bad, a bit harder to use it for cheating on your end. As long as all variables are still handled by the server (and this includes position and rotation) it shouldn't be a problem.

Although, I don't really see the benefits here. Hit detection is fairly straightforward and it takes more effort to draw a table than calculate if a bullet hit or not. Hitscan or projectile, doesn't change much.

It would be funny to try and find out what heroes were made first and who actually copied who, although I can make a fairly good guess since Overwatch's heroes have strong ties to their story while Gearbox is mostly "they happen to be on the bloc and decided to fight for… these guys!"

I know that Overwatch already has hacks with people seeing collision boxes around the oposing heroes, and there's almost nothing going on client-side.
Really hate these idiots that completely miss the point in playing videogames…

I don't understand this meme, honestly. Gamedev has gotten increasingly complex (unless you're shitting out phone games or indie shit), and it takes a huge amount of cash and time to make AAA games. If features are missing or whatever, it's because devs can't take as much time as they used to and/or are using much more complex tools that make it harder to deliver content.

Maybe it's me, but I didn't find any of OWs characters endearing or interesting. Aside from the huge wealth of OVerwatch SFM porn I now have, I don't care about any of them.

That's wrong on the account of art and rest of the rendering related costs have skyrocketed that is correct, but when the design is being made by a committee lead by marketing, your game designers get to do jackshit.

I especially pity level designers who has to listen to some jerkoff, doing CINEMATIC PANAROMAS in between CINEMATIC COMBAT ARENAS by stitching 3D models, never knowing the glories of func_wall and prop_decorate.

Take a look at Fallout 4. 7 years in development and what you got was a game where 2 Actors can't perform synchronized animations like hugging or shaking hands. You got a game where knee-high fences are obstacles Death-Claws can't get over simply because you are the only person capable of jumping in the whole game.
Fallout 4, in terms of technical detail, is still essentially the same game Morrowing was, but with a focus on Ranged instead of Melee. Same limitations, same AI, same gameplay.

I was expecting dynamic settlements that appear on interesting locations and can be raided or even destroyed by marauding parties.
I was expecting raiders to make their forts and raiding nearby towns.
I was expecting controlling a squad of teammates with actual commands during battle.
I was expecting the settlement mechanic to be much more indepth, important, interesting and fun.
I was expecting guns to be wildly different and no "this gun works best than everything else". Stalker did it, why couldn't they take a hint?
I was expecting ambushing enemies, having to guard locations and resource scarcity.

I was expecting all of this actually for Skyrim and yet FO4 comes around and still doesn't deliver.
If I wanted to shoot people in the face with lasers, I already have Quake, UT and many similar games.
If I wanted badly written RPGs, I have the Mass Effect trilogy for that.
If I wanted to build my own settlement, there's an entire genre of vydia built around this.
There's a ton of other games that have been done before that show a particular mechanic or gameplay. You look at games now and what you see is the same shit all over again and often worse than before, for some reason.

Devs aren't lazy because they don't meet our expectations, they are lazy because everything they are doing now has been done before, often better and they were supposed to improve on it, not re-invent the wheel but make it a square this time.

Personal opinion, I guess. But I have no problem admitting their story is a gigantic cliche and most of their characters follow suit. However as soon as you accept that and don't take the story very seriously, it becomes very entertaining.

Reaper is Edge: the Shadowhog taken to 11. He's the cringiest character ever and yet it's so fucking silly, you end up laughing about him.
Tracer is hated by everyone because of her "stupid accent", but as a caricature of cocky british girl? She's perfect.
Hanzo is your average jap samurai with "Honor your Master" and all that crap but he's funny because of what a gigantic steryotype he is.

I guess what I'd say is that Overwatch characters aren't supposed to be deep or interesting at all. They are supposed to be entertaining. Their personality and background is very short and shallow but it's still amusing to read on it and play as them.

Outside of studios directly owned by publishers (EA/Ubi, etc), that 'marketing designs the game!' shit doesn't happen.

What you see instead are likely situations where the specific type of game being made is partially influenced by marketing. Ex: 'Hey GBX, it's 2k. MOBAs and TF2 are big right now, so go make one of those.'

I'm sorry user, but I think you're confusing incompetence for laziness. In gamedev, one of the largest running costs of making a game is employee salaries. Therefore, it behooves dev studios to try to shit out a game as quickly as possible.

Every month the game is in development is another X number of copies that have be told to break even.

So in Bethesda's case, and in conjunction what all I've heard about FO3's development, I think they're just a largely incompetent and disorganized studio.

Oh sure; completely. I'm not commenting on anything other than how I think they're all pretty dull and monstrously blatant cliches.

ALso, since Overwatch is sub 7gb, do any of you anons get the impression Blizzard heard about Battleborn and was rushed by Activision to shit out Overwatch? Their biggest dev sector would have been the design and balancing, as not even the Competitive Mode came online until a month after launch.

Maybe ActiBlizz had the money and manpower to rush the game to market and shit all over Battleborn.

Of course, I have absolutely no idea how long back Blizzard started advertising Overwatch, so I could be totally wrong.

Also

>Stillborn was GBX's largest and most expensive game by far and also one of their largest failures
>mfw the Battleborn forums prohibit posting unless you own the game

The problem is there's no pressure to get rid of that incompetence. Make whatever boring game, slap some decent graphics on it, and shove a fuckton of marketing up it's ass and everyone's going to buy it because they don't know any better.

Nah, it's laziness. There's tons of arguments to back it up, from how skill checks were outright removed save from a single check that's horribly implemented to how the game has a GUI that's an even lazier port of a console GUI to enemy variety being solved with just "Legendary Enemies" that were exactly the same, but greener, bigger and with more HP.

They could have innovated a bit on the formula but most of their "improvements" are offensive to anyone that cares about videogames while still making something inferior to New Vegas (and I preferred the world of 3, actually) in terms of gameplay. That shit has no excuse except "they didn't even try".

Nah. During the Beta, they already had the game up and running to the point where they were actually testing Competitive and were adding new Heroes as well. The game was done a long time ago, they were just waiting for the right time to ship it while trying to cram any extra content they could for that day.

Battleborn never had a player base, never had an interesting concept on it's own that would attract anyone over other games or even on it's own.
The game could have been F2P with no competition on the day of release and it still wouldn't sell at all.

Seeing that Crowbat video showing a woman talking about the visual style being inspired in Anime and some other details shows that they didn't think much about the gameplay, just how it would look like because players want to "look like badasses when they are kicking butt". I'm sure someone in their company actually said this sentence during development.

Apparently not, as is certainly the case with games like Battleborn, Bioshock: Infinite, Battlefront, and other high profile shit games that don't begin with 'B'.

Forgive me user, but I don't think you understand how gamedev actually goes. Those changes seem, at least to me, to come from an intent to simplify the game to get a wider audience (a sin in itself) and because they were under time pressure to get the game released.

Without having insight into how good or bad the dev tools at Bethesda are, I'd put my cash on a combination of having middling tools, new/incompetent devs, and a time crunch. I think most people fail to appreciate how much of a pain in the ass it is to make games that simultaneously launch on all of the major platforms. Certification testing, manufacturing, ESRB evals, and so on are a monstrous pain in the dick and take months to do. Trust me. I know.

Yeah? So OW's been in dev for a while and maybe Battleborn was the pretender? Too delicious. I couldn't believe it at all that both games have a Zenyatta-type character. That kind of coincidental development doesn't fucking happen.

I also cannot understand Gearbox's fascination with the word 'badass'. It's like Wildstar and the 'cupcake' line. Is it one writer who falls back on it when they don't know what else to write? It's even on the back of the Battleborn box FFS.

Well, of course the regular beat grunt is gonna be taken off-guard and raped, once-in a-while, but what exactly do you think is gonna happen when people realise just how fucking feminine these things really are?

We will train them to wear skirts.

You can't say shit like that and not explain yourself, nigga. Now I'm curious about how you know.

1-Grab the Construction Kit for Morrowing.
2-Open a Fallout4 file with it.
3-Be amazed that it works
4-Be sad that it actually works
5-Laugh that it does work after all
6-Shoot yourself in the head because you now know they have been using the same engine for 15 years and at this rate, aren't gonna change ever.

I mean, you open the PiPBoy in FO3 to set up hotkeys and they are set in a radial display on the PC version? Why? We aren't using a DPad on the PC.
It would make sense if the excuse is "so it fits inside the PiPBoy HUD" except in FO4, hotkeys are displayed again in a Dpad-inspired desing requiring 1 or 2 taps in the same direction to use whatever you put there.
Nobody uses the arrow keys to navigate those hotkeys, we have 1-9 for that. They could have layed it out in a single line that shows up when you press any hotkey and it would look "PC-ish" but we still got the console HUD on the PC version for some reason.

This is what I'm talking about, it's simply changing the layout of the HUD in a way that matches the keys you are using to acess it. A cross shape for the DPad like they have but a single line for the PC. They could even be extra fancy and display it accordingly what you are playing the game with, leyboard or controller but not even the basic arranging of buttons to mirror your line of 1-9 was done, that's how lazy they are.

And before anyone tries to argue that this is very hard to do, a truckload of Gamebryo mods all feature their own HUD elements placed wherever the fuck you want and most mods are done specifically to readjust the position of HUD elements from the base game. It's the most basic of mods possible to make.

I didn't even knew they copied the character before that video. Shit's shamefull considering how Zenyatta ties so much into the lore and even has a few voice lines with Genji and Zarya.

It's a codeword for "you look cool blasting robots and playing videogames all day but this is not childish at all". It's literally what they think "fun" sounds like and most of their team ain't particularly interested in playing videogames, they much prefer "looking like a badass" in front of their friends.

I work in AAA gamedev, user; have since 2008. For Square-Enix in the US. Help me.

The internal tools are, unless Bethesda is even more of a shitshow than I imagined, much more robust and bespoke than the general purpose GECK.

It's also not uncommon for internal tools to be maintained since the technology likely builds on what came before it. EPIC did that for fucking ever with UnrealEd, for instance. Creating a new engine or switching to an existing one is a layer of hell you do not want to visit unless you have no choice otherwise.

I have Overwatch, I've played all the maps, and I've watched the intro movie. I have absolutely no goddamn idea what the lore in the game is supposed to be, why these weirdos and fetishists are all together, or why they're killing each other.

But they don't look cool! Screeching about how 'badass' your games are to appeal to friends is like showing other kids your sick Composition Notebook with monster sketches inside. Just like David Jaffe. And does their marketing department understand the concept of 'show don't tell'? FFS, if your game is badass, I'll figure that out through the gameplay; slapping a huge 'OVER 20lbs of PUSSY AND ASS' sticker on it won't make me think 'Wow, I was on the fence before, but this game is clearly badass! I'll take the Collector's Edition!'

Fucking apes at Gearbox, I swear.

F

I'm going to give you a clue here. Every game made by Bethesda using that wonderfull engine always had a Script Extender, since Morrowind to FO4.
It's merely an aplication and a few DLLs you drop in the same folder as the game that you gotta run if you want to use most mods.

All that thing does is add new functions and tools that actually allow some mods and ideas to be implemented or otherwise fix some bullshit they don't have.
Base tools do not include a function to look up the basic ID of an object. And they only have a single fucntion to delete objects that's incredibly buggy and leads to savegame bloat really fast, you need to use one that comes with SE to prevent those issues.

What's worse is that despite all these years, no one that works in the multiple Script Extenders has been hired by them, and none of those functions added to the base game, voiding the need for such a mod.
They literally don't incorporate the most basic shit that a few hacks had for the community that enable a lot of great gameplay changing mods. Of all the mods they stole from NV to implement in FO4, this was the one they absolutely had to get and nobody would be mad if they did, but it's the one they ignored. Again.

And yes, it's one of the most important tools out there. Without SE, you'll mostly just get reskins of your equipment or new areas re-using assets. It's SE that allows new AI behaviours or different gameplay mechanics to be added.

It's mostly in the wiki, their site and the comics, very little is seen in the game. King's Row is a map where you're pushing a payload but unless you go read on it, you'll never figure out it's an EMP bomb and the final state is an underground Omnic City. The purpose there is to kill the few Omnics that still live in London right after their leader was killed and spark a civil war. Other maps feature similar interesting objectives but you'll never get them just from playing the map. Payload in Numbani? Look at it and you'll see that glove that was part of the trailer, for instance.

Gearbox is completely disconnected from the videogame market. They are literally the "how do you do fellow gamers" of videogames. The entire Borderlands franchise is how they envision people enjoy FPS games with an RPG hack&slash loot system strapped on.
Their writers are old and grew up with some kind of fucked media giving them a distorted image of what's actually considered cool by everyone else.

Worst of all, they follow a very depressing trend by videogame devs: they don't care about the gameplay, just the story. Borderlands 2 and the next after that are mostly about telling you this epic story, the gameplay is just the same format but with some aditions to justify a new installment.

It's like Tim Shaffer that had SpaceBase and Broken Age to dev at the same time and the game that focused much more on gameplay (SpaceBase) had no love or budget at all, while the one that was all about telling this very touching story got millions of dollars.

This is probably not a very good argument in favour of Overwatch, but the fact that you don't know jack shit of the story from playing the game is currently a positive point. It shows where their focus really was and that's how fucked up everything else is.

Fair points all, user. I would assume Bethesda is more incompetent than they are lazy (because it seems like unfucking their tools and engine would let them do less work in the end to produce the same amount of content), but my original point still stands that most devs aren't lazy; despite how they might appear.

It's like I'm actually playing Destiny!

Joking aside, those mission descriptions remind me of the awesome objective-based maps in UT2K4 where you're recreating famous battles and events from the past. OW's are just infinitely less interesting.

From what I've heard from people who've worked with Gearbox, it's more arrogance than being out of touch. They had a few successes and fewer bombs, then after the success of Borderlands, they got very full of themselves. (Hence the Aliens Colonial Marines embezzlement debacle.) I've also heard there's a clique of original old school GBX devs who have been there since the OpFor days and then there's everyone else, and everyone else eats shit on a daily basis.

Generally untrue, I'm afraid. Or rather, a misconception. If you have a pool of existing content and want to reuse it without innovating much, then it falls on the level designers and writers to try to mask it as much as possible through new levels and a new story. Believe me when I tell you this user, story takes a backseat to goddamn everything else. I've seen entire storylines obliterated because the production schedule dictated we cut an entire level from the game. I've seen whole plots get refactored in the span of three months because a new Creative Director wanted to take the game 'in a different direction'. Just like their Hollywood screenwriter equivalents, writers get shat on all the time in gamedev. It's no coincidence, user, that so many video games have incomprehensibly bad plots. Although there are genuine hack writers out there like Mac Walters and Anthony Burch who make messes all on their own.

And user, we both know that Ubisoft is the 'How do you do, fellow gamers?' company. Just look at Watch Dogs 2. Repulsive.

I've got 600 hours in TF2, so I burned out on Overwatch in a single afternoon. After doing the math on XP gain, you get more in the long run by doing matches with the AIs than with people; so why deal with cheesing faggots and all of that if you just want to get loot boxes without paying?

I also feel like I have to reload way too gooddamn often. I just can't get into it, user. It feels like such a manicured and focus group-developed game to the point where it feels soulless. (Not in that Ubisoft way where there is legitimately no soul in the body at all, but close.)

I think you should play the game, or at least watch somebody play it.

Twice: "one hunter each stage before S3". That's one during S1, one during S2, for a total of two. Take down your proposed four hunters before S3, and that's a ( (0.25/4)*4= ) 25% penalty to the other team - with more than one death on a hunter giving a greater advantage.

This is classic risk-reward design: risk a bit of health for the reward of a permanent advantage against the hunters. Dodge the hunters for the entire game, and the advantage of health return on stage-up will be wasted. All the successful monster matches I've seen have the monster biding their time instead of rushing for S3, so each stage sees a reduction in hunter effectiveness in preparation for the final battle.

And you're quick to dismiss what exists in the game on principle of it being in a commercially unsuccessful game. The game sucked and has put its ideas in practice, and we have all the time to pick over why it didn't work.
Pot, kettle, etc. And that's a generous interpretation.

I have, several times. The only place you've tried out your ideas is in your head, where everything happens as you want it to rather than how players interpret it. Mechanics you want to add are in response to your experience with the game, instead of the majority of players or potential players. Your argument is 'The game didn't do well as-is, so you must accept my ideas since they will be better' - obviously biased and lacking critical thought.

You have XP to level up and unlock one of two talents everytime you do so.
You also have a currency that you can spend on turrets or to activate one of the 3 items you brought along.

Everytime you start the game, you are level 1 with no currency at all. You always start from the beginning in every single match.
Was this supposed to appeal to Borderland fans that are used to grinding for loot for several months and hate losing their equipment?

My mistake, I understood wrongly that you were implying 10% penalty for the 4 hunters.
But that said, it's still a dumb point. Even at 100%, they are still weaker when working together than the Monster at S3. You do not need that advantage to win at that point, making such strategy a gimmick. And considering they are risking 10% of their power with every downed Hunter while you are risking 100% of your power in a fight where they have the advantage? That doesn't make any sense!

All the sucessfull matches I've seen have the monster either feeding or sneaking. They do not rush it but they avoid combat as much as possible. Literally the only time I've ever seen Monsters fighting during S1 or S2 was when they were locked by the Dome or the Hunter was alone. And even then, as soon as more showed up or the Dome went down, they ran off instead of testing their odds.

Find me in any of my posts where I said "This sucks because the game did not sell". The design of the game is fucked up, period. The amount of sales it got has nothing to do with it, it was doomed from the start.
This was no fucking GameJam or some hipster competition with a limit of 48 hours. They had years to try and test new shit, especially while the artists were busy drawing more DLC to sell later. Don't you come to me with the excuse "they just didn't had enough time!", it's the dumbest excuse you can use to justify any AAA development.

There's this neat game called Left 4 Dead were these ideas work perfectly well. Hunters\Survivors have more to do than just run around (finding supplies, fighting random mobs, prepare for Crescendos) while Infected\Monster doesn't just run like a bitch everytime it's found nor does it lurk in a corner until it can play as the Tank.
In fact, this game was so sucessfull and loved by people, they even made a sequel, fancy that!

There's also The Hidden mod for Half Life that follows the same mold as Evolve but it uses stealth instead of brute force for the monster and it seems to be more popular than Evolve.

Meanwhile, there's the Saxton Hale mod that is pretty much Evolve S3 and it's not a very popular mode because it's not particularly very interesting or fun beyond a few matches.

There's many different implementations of Evolve's idea where things panned okay or not okay depending on a few key factors, it's not "inside my head" you nignog.

What I'm saying are proposals on how to fix the gameplay grabbing the actual concepts behind the game, not just "wouldn't it be cool" points.
The monster doesn't fight in S1&2. That's an objective problem with the game and you gotta solve it.
The Dev's idea is to give him some minimal benefit in the long run that he doesn't need in the first place if he reaches S3.
My idea is to give him the oportunity to be incredibly agressive.
Hunter's do nothing during S1&2 but run around.
The Dev's idea is to give them all a Dome to end the match as soon as one spots the monster or albino creatures for buffs.
My idea is to give them other objectives they can work on to end the game, forcing the monster to fight them.

My ideas actually adress and solve the problem. The Dev ideas are a band aid that's not even applied in the wound.
How are they biased? What do I stand to gain here? Why would I even take a stand in any form or way except in wanting a better game?
Tell me then how would players interpret a respawning Monster that gains Evolution Points from Damage Done instead of eating. How can this possibly be "misinterpreted" by the players and how can this possibly lead to a worse game than what Evolve is currently?

From a financial point of view, Evolve was a success.

Battleborn and Brink were both commercial failures though.

It doesn't surprise me that normalfags derive fun from the objectively shitty.

Wew.
Nice oxymoron you got there.

Exactly. It has all this codex and dictionary bullshit, but it apparently wants you to have fun.

Either go full fun, or try to make things serious. That's what makes it all so unappealing to discuss, since you're just splurging about impossible bullet calibers and power levels.

Never said "action and bad ass shit", by the way. Nice straw statement.

You implied it.

i could call this from a mile away

i knew all of these games were going to bomb after seeing the first trailer

But fun is subjective, user. And considering "fun" is all the value entertainment products have (and less you trade hats…) than videogames only have a subjective value to them. Now seeing how a product is only worth as much as someone wants to pay for it, the entire value of a particular videogame is just as much as someone finds it fun.
Or in other words: "this game is 20$ worth of Fun for me"

I won't argue that CoD and similar franchises are terrible games. But a lot of people have enough fun with them that they agree it's worth 60$ for them and that you can't simply dismiss. Should they get better taste? Sure. Does that mean the games are actually worth a lot less than 60$? For you and me, yes. For them, not at all.

Re-read it again. Too many words FOR add bait. He's saying both things don't make sense together.

I'd argue that the point of Warhammer is that you don't really need to get into both sides of the spectrum to enjoy it, you can just like Big Dudes in Tough Armor killing lots of Green Bad Guys, or you can read a very interesting story about that setting that's pretty neat (albeit somewhat retarded).

However, I'd say Warhammer does a fairly bad job at storytelling because they keep trying to make it all about this grimdark Universe where Humanity doesn't stand a chance against literally everything else. And yet the entire design of the human factions makes them look so badass you can't believe they can't win against everyone else.
The gigantic horde of Orcs, Tyranids and the entirety of the warp are not very good story telling elements to settle in the grim tone they want to make when you see humanity kicking ass 80% of the time.

That's nice. CoD is still objectively shit.
Yes. Yes I can, and do all the time. A retard's opinion isn't worth a damn with me.

No, my friend, it is you implying such things. Try taking arguments at face value.

The main failure of it is the fact they don't care for the old adage of "show, not tell".

People show more interest, the more is teased to them. If you give a whole load of shit, and keep piling onto it, you get a mess, a waste, a big fat mistake.

Sorry if that's what I took from something seemingly complaining about masculanity in a video game.

Do know that it's about execution. You can't just shove half a pound of steak down a man's throat, and expect him to make Clint look like a cunt.

Except for the characters you've unlocked, the third talents you've unlocked (yes, it becomes a three-way choice as you progress), the gear you've collected, etc.

5%; remember, two downs is ~10%. (Actually 12.5%, so 6.25% for one, but there's enough convolution to make that precision pointless)

See the connection? When Dome is down or a hunter is isolated there's little risk in attacking, and doing so can net an advantage. When the odds shift - more hunters, trapped in Dome - then the monster shifts to evasion and defence. It's not that the monster doesn't risk anything when attacking at an advantage, but that the potential for loss is greatly reduced.

If you think that isn't a valid reason, you're a serious basket case. Pay attention to game development - not games but game development - for time and money are constantly limiting factors. Game studios have employees who want to be paid for their work, so longer development means greater expense.

Are we seeing a pattern here, dipshit? You aren't thinking about what the devs did wrong, you're thinking about how to actualize your ideas. Your ideas haven't been tested outside of your head - go make a mod and prove me wrong. I guarantee whatever you make will be ignored because the mechanics you're copying don't have the supporting elements which made them good in their source.

Hunters stay in a tight group the whole time, limiting the damage done by the monster. Monster players rant about how "4v1 isn't fair", and how the game was poorly designed. Oh, but you can't imagine how this could happen because of how well the concept worked in another game, so there's no way players would think that.

One 'the' big reasons is actually copyrights iirc. Yakuza has japanese companies, even people, that actually exist in the game.
So if you wanna bring those over, you have to bring/change all of that stuff. And localisers would rather burka up female characters, butcher characters and add cheap shots at their audience than actually do any real work.

Power Fists?
They're not goofy, and they're not that big (tough some artists go overboard)

Not everything has to be a uggu loli, you sick fuck.
The female models look fine, it's you who has the problem, not the game.

All the female models have man jaws or are very buff. You're a faggot if you think any of them look good.

Going by the standard of just how big these guys are, they're pretty big. Fuck. It's all big. It's HUEG. The Square-Cube Law is paramount, when you're trying to keep suspension-of-disbelief. Disobeying it is one thing, but outright fucking with it is another.

Not with those jawlines.

The division is a Ubisoft game.

They could at least try to make a proper woman. Oh wait, maybe you think monkeys and women with square man jaws are cute.

*cough*

When someone entered bullet time, it only affected players who were within line of sight.

sucks that all i can do is sit here and watch

And you think fans of shooters like that? Having some of the content locked in what's supposed to be a fair fight? Try telling a Quake fan "for this match, you'll spawn with only these 3 guns"

If the idea is to appeal to MOBA fans (since this is mostly the progression you'll see there) many other games did the same and better. From LoL rune system to the HotS talents that are locked until you either have some experience with that specific hero or with the game itself or even Paladins and the Unreal alternative with their card system that looks fundamentally more interesting.

Again, no playerbase exists or ever existed that could possibly prefer their game over any of the alternatives, especially at the price they asked for. And they knew what their competition was and they still went with that price and that business model. The only thing that killed Stillborn was their dumb decisions in marketing and making the game, completely disregarding previous games and current competition. No amount of marketing budget would salvage that crap.

You are counting on isolated hunters for the situation to not be a danger for the monster. This makes as much sense as counting on AFK players for an easy win.
Most teams do not have isolated hunters, they are never that far from each other. At best they'll give the monster the illusion that "now's a good time to strike" but quickly gather up and murder him.
And considering how they are gonna give every hunter a dome, even attacking isolated hunters is gonna be a high risk gamble for the monster now.
Totally solving the problem here…

And if you think that's a valid reason, I guess Tim Shaffer isn't such a bad guy after all. This wasn't the polish or the marketing campaign or some late-stage part of the game development that was done in a poor way. This was the very core idea by which development started.

You want to look at "game development", start here. They had the idea of a Monster chasing Hunters around in an asymetrical fight, this was their starting point. They had literally the whole time of development to consider that "maybe this isn't such a fun idea, maybe the players will just run around hiding from the hunters instead of actually fighting". They pledged a very large amount of money and work hours on an idea that was already wrong from the moment someone said "Hey, what if…".

Before they even decided on what engine they were going to work, this was something that needed to be solved and anyone could have noticed what a terrible idea this was and how most games would end up looking like.

And because of that they are 100% wrong? Nice argument, dipshit. They haven't been proven right so I can't say I'm 100% right but they haven't been proven wrong so you can't say they are 100% wrong either. But what anyone can say is that literally anything is better than what is currently implemented. Even just reskinning L4D with monsters instead of zombies would make a far superior game than Evolve.

Oh, you mean S3? Didn't knew that part of the game was "poorly designed"…
Even in S1 the Monster still has a very large amount of Health and Shields that let him live for a very large amount of time. And where it not for the whole "losing the game" detail, he'd be able to deal some serious damage to the hunters during that stage just by fighting until he's dead. Of course the Hunters can limit the damage done to them, that's the whole point to their side. Doesn't mean the monster can't deal enough damage to Evolve if he is better than the other team and do better next respawn.

And you can't imagine how this could be a good idea because you think Evolve is just fine as it is. Have fun running around, I guess?

...

I think you may have the wrong guy.

Plz quote right, or remake posts if you quote wrong.

Talk to TF2. Horizontal progression doesn't give unfair fights. Again, please play the game or watch someone else play it.

If the hunters plan to win, yes. This is (again) classic risk and reward where the hunters need to spread out to find and corner the monster, but doing so risks an isolated hunter.

Remember the part about "half-baked hindsights"? This is one of them. We now know that most monster players will consider the risk of downing a hunter in S1/S2 to be greater than the reward. The devs made effort to address it by giving health back on stage-up and having hunters do worse if they clumped together before S3, yet how could the devs have known the effectiveness of those elements before the game was made and played?

Here's the dissonance I'm picking at. When you're called to think about your ideas being tested, you know that you can't absolutely speak about how good they are; could be totally right, could be totally wrong, but nobody knows until they're tested. Think about what Evolve is though, and you immediately make an assumption about the quality of your ideas.

Notice how you flip between S1 being stacked against the monster (Evolve as-is) and S1 being fair (your Evolve), due to something which hasn't been changed. How the skill of the monster player is irrelevant (as-is) but then enough to swing the game (you).

Every time I make a statement about Evolve's overall quality, I always say it's bad. As a whole, it just doesn't work. But I won't damn specific mechanics without showing that changing those mechanics (and only those mechanics) improves the game.

...

You call having an extra talent to choose from or better items "horizontal"? TF2 weapons are sidegrades and stock weapons are still considered superior, I doubt the default items your character has (if he has default items…) are better than what you unlock or that the third talent you unlock does not contain some of the best upgrades you can get.

Besides already sounding like a retarded idea… From the moment a monster sees a lone Hunter and he pings the Monster position to his team, how long does it take for the other Hunters to arrive, even if they are spread out? Again, they are either spread out enough that this works (and it just means it's a bad Hunter team) or they don't and this always backfires.

I've seen a few gameplay videos where the Monster just runs the fuck away whenever someone starts shooting at him. He doesn't even look back to see how many are there, he knows the others are coming and he ain't gonna risk the Dome. (Lol, dome for everyone!)

Remenber that they only give health to the Monster if he makes it to the next stage. The problem here was that Monsters did not want to risk LOSING those engagements. That extra help does not make those engagements any less dangerous for them and it still doesn't make them any more worth the risk.

Evolve is broken. Any idea is better because it's at least an attemp at fixing the game. Hat Economy as a way to save the game is better than Evolve currently and it's likely to be a shit idea, but still better than what they currently have.
There's no dissonance here, any other idea just has to be better than Evolve to be a positive change and at the moment anything is better than Evolve. I could have sugested an Hat Economy and it still would be better than Evolve since at least you'd have Goliaths running around with Sombreros.

S1 Monster has enough power to cause serious damage to a team but not to win a fight. Really not getting how you're failing to understand this.
He will never kill a full team on S1 unless the other team is really bad, but he can cause a lot of damage before dying.
Now make him respawn after a while and he can actually spend all of his HPs dishing out the full potential to damage the other team, instead of just running away as soon as the Dome goes down.

Again: strong enough to damage, weak enough to win. So play on the damage part and let him respawn, but reward how well he did past life.
This makes the monster be the agressive beast he's supposed to be instead of the little bitch he currently is.

There are default items. Still repeating myself here; go play the game or watch someone play it instead of speculating about knowable things. I'm not going to spoonfeed you information that takes less than 30min to find.

Depends upon if the hunter was pounced or merely attacked, how early the hunter saw the monster, and the spacing of the hunters. In other words, the skill of the monster compared to the hunters.

This is a problem. The thing to pay attention to is that the monster players don't know they won't do well, but they think they won't do well. Belief rather than fact.

Gating multiplayer behind a tutorial stage, placing new players in a starting matchmaking pool for a certain number of games, offering achievements for taking risks during S1/S2, providing an in-game and/or post-game indication of how the difference in power, using official channels to promote videos of players demonstrating how effective monsters can get an early advantage, etc. These could address the cause of a perception of weakness without changing mechanics.

I really hope you aren't stupid enough to believe this. If a bridge wasn't designed well, will setting it on fire improve it because it changes the bridge?

By "win a fight" do you mean "Completely kill the hunters in a straight-up fight" or "Ambush and kill one isolated hunter"? The prior should obviously be very difficult against a competent hunter team, but the latter should be the monster's means until S3.

If attacking only gives benefit and offers no penalty, of course the monster will attack more often. But why change the fundamental structure of the game - making the hunters always the hunted - when the problem is merely "Monster players don't think attacking is to their advantage pre-S3"? Why jump to make the largest change to the game without considering what smaller changes could do?

You're more concerned with making the game good with your ideas than with making the game good with minimal effort. If you think your ideas are a gold mine and I'm an idiot for not realizing it, spend your own time and money to tap into that wealth. But when the cost is on someone else, don't chide them for dismissing your proposition until its profitability can be proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

Ready for the gamers game sequel that won 4 e3 awards Holla Forums ?

archive.is/qTVwp

It's not a sequel, user.

There's already been leaks regarding exactly what this "surprise" really is. It's a re-release.

Left 4 Dead 3?

They've already made too much an asses of themselves to go back to Valve, without acting the fool.

Pretty sure they left Valve because they weren't even Valve, they were just left behind, something about "teamwork" with valve not being good enough or something.

Exactly. They got all big about how Valve kept "ruining" their vision, when they were fixing what they were already fucking up by making everything into a "multiplayer experience".

Battleborn shouldn't have put its release so close to Overwatch. For really similar games and Blizzard having a huge fanbase waiting to suck their dicks… it really wasn't ever going to be a competition. Overwatch isn't perfect but it's way better than Battleborn.

Yeah, I guess. Valve could bring back Turtle Rock because they like wasting money though.

They have priorities, user, and your desires for a third Left 4 Dead to download onto your skinnerbox will not qualify enough for that.

Doesn't teach anything about the actual game if it's against Bots, players assume other players don't do as bad or as well as bots.
Doesn't teach anything since the other players are just as bad.
They do, actually. They tell the monster to run away and feed before engaging the Hunters.
If there is a perception of weakness here it's because there's an actual weakness there. The Monster is weaker than the Hunter team during S1 and S2. Fact.

If he engages them, he is not gonna be able to kill them all at all, at best he'll get a few down but he is risking losing the game at that stage. Assuming equal skill of course between all 5 players, of course. You can show videos all you want about "how this can maybe not end horribly, so you may want to try it? please?" but at the end of the day, the game is not design for the Monster to win at S1 and S2 but it's designed so he doesn't need those advantages at S3.

This is much like the meta in many competitive games that usually degenerates into a single strategy that's used by everyone because it's simply the most effective. Sure, you can try all these gimmicks and weird ways to win and sometimes they even work.
But most players are gonna play it safe, run and feed and only engage when they have the upper hand and you're gonna have a hard time convincing them it's a good idea to risk the match for the chance to be even more OP during S3.

At least it forces a new bridge to be built.

What smaller changes? Domes for everyone? What about we stop putting bandaid on gushing wounds and actually put up real solutions?
If it's the very core of the game that's badly done than that's what you have to chance, you don't patch the rest of the game so it adapts to the problem, you solve the problem.
The problem is "the monster is heavily punished and lightly rewarded for attacking players in S1&2", you solve this by doing exactly the oposite: lightly punish him for dying with a respawn timer and highly reward him with Evolution Points. There, agressive monster is on now.

I'm really sick and tired of this shit, this is a blatant lie lazy people like to tell themselves. There's no fucking way to do anything good without actual effort. Everytime you think you found a shortcut that reduces the effort it will take to do something, it either makes new problems or doesn't solve yours as well as you though.
You want to make something good, there's no "minimal effort" involved.
This is the kind of thinking that leads to Starbound.

KYS

That's just their new update that's supposed to fix the game. It doesn't, though.
It gives the Dome ability that was unique to the Trapper to literally everyone, so now engaging a single Hunter is an even bigger risk for the Monster.
Get this, though… This was supposed to be a fix for Monsters always running away and never fighting. Yeah, they made that fight even more dangerous for the Monster and they actually think they are fixing anything.

They've also given everyone health regen so the Medic has less pressure on him. Why? Because "toxic gamers" kept blaming the medic everytime they died and how "Medics are incompetent as fuck". They made one of the least played classes in the game even less necessary or appealing in an attempt to fix it.

Turtle Rock's idea of "fixing" things seems to be "shoot a bullet at it, see if it twitches afterwards.

After hearing about this one, I went online (have PS4). Servers full of people and I was again hooked for couple of hours. This "legend" about Destiny community dying is spread, because retards don't realise that they are fewer people with PS3/X360 these days (you know, the "pervious gen" thingy).

It's f2p can't buy evolve on steam anymore

It retarded 1 v 4 can't work in exports shit they just have to add in player controlled wildlife.

The medics that had shit healing like the robot and revive guy will be op compared to sniper bitch.

I bet you they throw on another 4 hunters and monster

...

It's official boys

2k fucked us hard but

It's f2p