Evolve, new shooter from Left 4 Dead devs - now F2P, still dead

[sser]

So basically The Thing or Predator?

Sign me up. I really liked L4D even if the sequel wrung the idea dry.

 

[Zed]

This game being fun relies entirely on whether my friends will play it or not. Chances are they will not.

I like the idea though. Sounds like that Darwin's Island map for WC3.

 

[Aldebaran]

Yeah, this immediately reminded me of a WC3 custom map. And then I was reminded of Parasite. Glorious, glorious Parasite. The gem that was drowned in the murky tide of Dota clones.

It seems interesting, and I would be lying if I said I wasn't a little excited by the novelty.

 

[Multidirectional]

Did you mean Team Deathmatch?

No. Have you actually played the damn thing?

 

[zwanzig_zwoelf]

Did you mean Team Deathmatch?

No. Have you actually played the damn thing?

I almost always play games alone, so I didn't play the versus of L4D.

 

[Multidirectional]

So you just like saying things for no reason, ok. I'm sure you'll fit right in.

 

[zwanzig_zwoelf]

So you just like saying things for no reason, ok. I'm sure you'll fit right in.

No, I say shit based on the stuff I've learned about versus mode quite some time ago and knowledge of the gameplay concepts of L4D.
It still looks like Team Deathmatch to me, so I said what I thought about it.

 

[Multidirectional]

It still looks like Team Deathmatch to me, so I said what I thought about it.

Well then you're stupid. Or you have no idea what Team Deathmach is. Which means you express opinions about things you have no clue about. Which means you're stupid.
Ok, that's enough derailing on my part, arguing with tards isn't worth it.

 

[zwanzig_zwoelf]

It still looks like Team Deathmatch to me, so I said what I thought about it.

Well then you're stupid. Or you have no idea what Team Deathmach is. Which means you express opinions about things you have no clue about. Which means you're stupid.
Ok, that's enough derailing on my part, arguing with tards isn't worth it.

I might try it later, and it'll be fun to see if I am right.
Then again, why would you care about it, since you've had your share of acting like a pompous faggot for today.

 

[UserNamer]

I only played the first L4D for quite some time, almost every week at least a few hours back in the day, but Valve handled that shit poorly and more importantly they lied.
Instead of fixing some of the issues and bugs it was having (much too easy to rush through some maps, hiding in the closet and pushing being the most successful tactic through waves and stuff like that, adding additional content and continuing like they had promised) they instead decided to cash-in and released L4D2 a whole year later, I think they announced it a whole 5-6 months after the first one was released and a whole lot of people were really pissed because they documentably lied through their asses, ended support for the first game for a rushed, worse second part with shittier maps, characters and features and split the community (ignore the histrionics of the narrator, but this pretty much sums up their promises):


It was their biggest PR-fail at that point (and I guess still might be) and there was this whole "boycott Left 4 Dead 2" thing going on, but they turned it all around by buying off the initiators and turning it into positive spin: http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2009/09/valve-co-opts-l4d2-boycott-by-giving-leaders-free-trip-to-hq/

I loved l4d1 and I played it with my real life buddies, we were glad they decided to release a quick much improved sequel so quickly. Very, very dumb objections to l4d2 and I say this as a guy who is blinded by the hatred it has towards valve (though the characters in l4d2 are totally completely retarded, very dumb character design got to admit it)

See l4d1 was in many way a novel, well executed game, and it desperately needed a quick sequel which just polished the game a bit and added a bunch of new settings, weapons and monster. Supporting l4d for years to come would have been a stupid decision, I know they didn't keep their promises, but 1-who the fuck cares 2-those were lame retarded promises 3- the game probably needed a big overhaul. It was an experiment, it was successful, and it deserved to be redone with a bigger budget

They are keeping tf2 up to date, but that just seems morbid to me. They are just basically injecting hats and broken weapons and hats with particle effects into an aging cadaver of an old game. Making new games seem better to me than just supporting old shit through the eons, but whatever. REPLAY VALUE. who the fuck cares. (Making money by selling overpriced virtual hats to spoiled brats, much more MORAL than just making money with new games right?)

anyway evolve doesn't sound interesting to me. 4 vs 1 monster. More like a gimmick than a full fledged game, but we'll see

 

[Dexter]

I loved l4d1 and I played it with my real life buddies, we were glad they decided to release a quick much improved sequel so quickly. Very, very dumb objections to l4d2 and I say this as a guy who is blinded by the hatred it has towards valve (though the characters in l4d2 are totally completely retarded, very dumb character design got to admit it)

See l4d1 was in many way a novel, well executed game, and it desperately needed a quick sequel which just polished the game a bit and added a bunch of new settings, weapons and monster. Supporting l4d for years to come would have been a stupid decision, I know they didn't keep their promises, but 1-who the fuck cares 2-those were lame retarded promises 3- the game probably needed a big overhaul. It was an experiment, it was successful, and it deserved to be redone with a bigger budget

They are keeping tf2 up to date, but that just seems morbid to me. They are just basically injecting hats and broken weapons and hats with particle effects into an aging cadaver of an old game. Making new games seem better to me than just supporting old shit through the eons, but whatever. REPLAY VALUE. who the fuck cares. (Making money by selling overpriced virtual hats to spoiled brats, much more MORAL than just making money with new games right?)

anyway evolve doesn't sound interesting to me. 4 vs 1 monster. More like a gimmick than a full fledged game, but we'll see

I'm sorry but that is almost entirely BS, what they needed to do is take their time and add some more maps/campaigns and content to the first and not abandon it all and rush to make an overall shittier game for the second. They could've released a sequel 2-3 years later and not announced it 5 months after the firsts release.
Instead of fixing the problems inherent in the game e.g. closet-spamming, rushing and so on which they partly did by introducing the spitter and charger in the second they made their own "Dragon Age 2" situation where they rushed an entire second game out in a year to cash-in on the popularity of the first.

The survivors were worse, the maps were almost entirely all worse (there was not a single "No Mercy", "Blood Harvest" or "Death Toll" quality Versus map in L4D2), it had shittier animations and they hadn't even fixed a lot of the bugs that were available in the first (they even took weeks to fix that one door-bug that would ruin parts of certain bugs and was almost game breaking) and hunters were more useless (generally the amount of new special infected they added made it harder to plan ahead and actually strategize - like getting 3 hunters and a smoker and planning a takedown of their entire team), they unbalanced large parts of the game and introduced some additional infected that didn't actually make the game better and so on. It's like they didn't exactly playtest a lot of the stuff much. There's also a lot more no-skill takedowns etc. that you had to plan before. They even stole some of the ideas for special infected from people on the forums, like the Charger.

Also I fucking cared, I bought the game after having played CS:S and TF2 for quite a while and was very much hoping and having the expectation that they'd continue working on it and fix those things (especially since they said so themselves) and add that additional content like they promised and have always done previously instead of pulling a "haha, fooled you" out of their ass. And L4D was one of the Multiplayer games I played with friends the most, hundreds of hours and putting up PUGs via IRC with worthy opponents that didn't play like shit, releasing the second led to a situation where some would continue playing L4D while others started playing L4D2 and kind of took all the fun out of it.

This was also the year before they decided to ruin Team Fortress 2 with this shit: http://www.teamfortress.com/mannconomy/ and many other questionable decisions in regards to microtransactions like the Portal 2 store that they managed to conceal till after release: http://www.maximumpc.com/article/ga...sed_portal_2_store_raises_eyebrows_sells_them and some of the latest changes with the "Market", "Badges" and "Trading Cards" to Steam itself. It was kind of the first dent in Valves largely clean vest till then. (And I say this as a guy who isn't blinded by their hatred towards Valve)

 

[Metro]

L4D2 was a shit cash grab. At most they should have sold it as a DLC to the first for like $10. L4D series never got the proper support it should. It even took them like a year after L4D2 launch to do weekly maps/mutations and such.

 

[UserNamer]

Dexter I don't want to spend time defending Valve, after all I kinda loathe them ("blinded by hatred" was hyperbole) , for reasons like their stupid as shit bloatware Steam required to play games to their "get mentally ill people and spoiled brats to pay big dollars for virtual hats" scheme.

But I think that sometimes a quick "cash in" sequel is warranted. Ie taking the same game, fixing the details and some stuff, and adding a ton of content. (and it's not like they started releasing a l4d a year)

The year when l4d was released, me and my friends spent a million hours with the game. We were really happy that they decided to charge for instant new full fledged campaigns, improved graphics, new weapons and enemies, instead of adding a couple levels every few decades or so. We would have surely lost interest before getting the same amount of content and fun that l4d2 offered (it was also a relatively cheap game, we bought the 4 pack or something).

Regarding the specific criticism to the game per se, I don't know what to tell you man, me and my friends loved it, it was great, again I only agree on the survivors being shittier

-adding on "cash in" sequels, one of my favorite games ever was Doom 2, that didn't add much to the original, yet it offered hours of new gameplay using a formula that was still fresh, amplifying and redefining it in many ways (the large scale open battles against hordes of enemies were actually properly introduced in doom2). This is just to say that sometime a game is good enough and fresh enough that I'm willing to pay good money for a quick sequel with tons of new content immediately instead of waiting years. In my opinion we can really talk about proper cashing in when they start releasing identical sequels every year in rapid succession.... or when they start charging additional gameplay by the hour via ultra small dlc packs

 

[abija]

That's what you have expansions for, quick cash grab while you just improve a bit on your game, spend 1 year to do a couple of maps and fix bugs and everyone is happy.

 

[illuknisaa]

L4D2 has realism => 2>1

Without realism every versus game always ends up both teams getting full points and winner is decided who gets that extra 25pts bonus. Realism fixes that by adding much higher skill cap.

No more wallhacking, commons being just cannon fodder or pill overdose.

 

[Caim]

Hm, I'll keep an eye on this but as of now I don't know if it'll be fun.

 

[Clockwork Knight]

And L4D was one of the Multiplayer games I played with friends the most, hundreds of hours and putting up PUGs via IRC with worthy opponents that didn't play like shit, releasing the second led to a situation where some would continue playing L4D while others started playing L4D2 and kind of took all the fun out of it.

The other points are valid, but this is kind of what naturally happens when a new game is released

 

[Psquit]

Cant wait to play a game with a bunch of trolls that spam shitty music on their mics or team kill.

 

[Wirdschowerdn]

The trick here is not to play with a bunch of trolls.

 

[shihonage]

It still looks like Team Deathmatch to me, so I said what I thought about it.

Well then you're stupid. Or you have no idea what Team Deathmach is. Which means you express opinions about things you have no clue about. Which means you're stupid.
Ok, that's enough derailing on my part, arguing with tards isn't worth it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cooperative_gameplay

Well, don't want to sound like a dick or nothin', but it says on your chart that you're fucked up. You talk like a fag, and your shit's all retarded.

The trick here is not to play with a bunch of trolls.

This becomes challenging when you're an adult who has to schedule a game with 3 other friends and you all have to be available at the same time.

The real trick here is to let players disable incoming voice, and not punish them for it. Programmatic solutions are real solutions, while behavioral solutions are wishy-washy hopey-dopey fairytale crap.

 

[Ninja Destroyer]

I'm playing it very often, have over 800 hours in it, and this is utter bullshit. As long as you don't choose "Best Available Dedicated" server option when hosting you don't have to worry about it being modded. Unless that's something that happens exclusively in Campaign mode, which I don't play.

I only play Campaign mode. And the only way to find unaltered servers is to use the game console. It's pathetic.

Could you elaborate on this shihonage? I tried to play campaign, but had some really bad servers.

 

[sea]

Weird, I thought that Valve had bought Turtle Rock or something, didn't know they were able to go to another publisher.

Could be cool. These guys obviously know what they are doing and I wouldn't mind seeing a decent co-op shooter that isn't just another horde mode. The idea sounds quite original and fun, though who knows how replayable it really is - I found Left 4 Dead got a bit boring after a while even with new content, but maybe having this "asymmetric PvP" will help that.

 

[MapMan]

The most fun I had with L4D was when we did speed runs while trying to kill each other. I hoped for L4D to be this hardcore, coop survival game (pretty much what no more room in hell aimed for), instead it turned out to be mediocre, one shot zombies action game.

PS:

Spoiler

L4D ripped of ZPS!

 

[tuluse]

Left4Dead is cool because is has asymmetric multiplayer which is pretty much never done.

 

[Excidium]

I never liked versus much.