...You are pretty much doing the same thing. I mean you can fool yourself into thinking your not, but you can only chase a monster around a circle so many times until you've seen everything the game has to offer.

PS: There are plenty of single player games where you have multiple ways to play, there is procedural generation or other random elements allowing for increased replayability, often with more variety than two multiplayer matches.

Also, as I've said before, I do think that games should have a more dynamic pricing system. Games like Evolve shouldn't be selling for 60$ with that amount of content, however, I don't see why the comparison to Monster Hunter is silly. Yes, it is a handheld game...compare it to Monster Hunter tri if you want. That was a console game, and while it had less content than 4U, it still had a ton of content. Even still, the point stands. Evolve does not justify its price and as such, I don't think it deserves to sell well at 60$

I'll second that thought, the game has a nice concept I really like, and play the beta I enjoyed the game. It'll wait for an inclusive edition before buying the game, which will be about a year from now.

The gameplay is great and if someone gets hundreds of hours out of a game then it being MP only or MP focused like Evolve (it has a SP) doesn't mean it should by default be cheaper.

Because again, then you'd need to adjust other games. The Order should be $20 tops. Dying Light has a meaty SP and a MP component, maybe it should cost $90.

There's a silly double standard with online games.

There is 2 dlc packs (1 currently other is exclusive to PC monster race edition but will be released later). One is 4 new hunters and some skins other is 4 new hunters and 1 new monster. The rest of the overpriced DLC is just skins and shit, its not really removing content from the game... In fact all the stuff thats DLC except for skins isn't even in the game yet, 4th monster (which you get free if you preorder) and 4th set of hunters will be released in the spring, the rest even later.

People really should look up things before they post you do NOT get more ripped of DLC wise in this game than most other games, especially not if you compare it to games like CoD or Battlefield. I'm not happy about them having lots of overpriced skins as DLC but its not really ripping of since it doesn't bring anything to the game except for cosmetics, if you don't want it you just don't buy it...

If a game doesn't have a lot of content and adopts a strategy similar to that of a lot of free to play games ( release with a tiny amount of content, has extremely slow progression, sells you additional pieces of the game at a premium ), it shouldn't be trying to get away with being 60$. Its obviously not a simple time:money relationship, however, Evolve does not justify its price with only three monsters in the base game (and one as a pre order bonus). If a game cannot justify its price, it shouldn't be that price. 

Once again, single player games often have more content than multiplayer games. This means more of the time spent playing, you will be seeing something new. This counts for a lot, when it comes to validating a game's price. I believe that 10 hours, seeing something new around every corner is worth more than 10 hours doing the same thing repeatedly with different people. 

However, the key takeaway is that price should be dynamically evaluated for every game, looking at the content that game provides and establishing how much that game is worth. Look at the Japanese video game market for an example of this. It obviously isn't a perfect system as more value is often given to established brands, but I think it is a significant step forwards from the "everything is 60$ (excluding DLC)" model we use today...

Once again, my point is that, in this particular instance, Evolve doesn't have enough content to justify its price. Every game needs to be evaluated differently, so don't pretend like I'm trying to set some mathematical rule to be applied as a blanket for all games. 

doesn't take nearly as much craftsmanship or time and care to make a few MP maps and put it on random cycle than to craft a 12 hour story with new gameplay encounters every level

Or, bare with me here, people don't like for a developer to tote around their DLCs around like they are doing us a goddamn favor. Many of those cosmetics could have been unlocked through regular means but instead, it became DLC, $136 worth of DLC. That is (pardon my french) fucking oturageous givng that it is a full retail, $60 purchase. 

On a serious note, it is hard to say until we get number. I hope people get the game itself and ignore the DLC completely. Show turtle rock that they appreciate a fine and well made game, but despise having day one DLC of these massive proportions.

I saw people play it on ustream. It just seems like a paper-thin concept. I love new and different things,but not at the expense of bordeom and sameness. I'm also not really big on co-op.

It doesn't have a tiny amount of content. There is more than enough content there to keep you engaged, if you enjoy the gameplay. I have 20 hours played already, my main account is less than halfway progressed. Two of my monsters haven't been touched, my Goliath is maybe halfway leveled up. I have one medic almost to elite status, one medic working on the second star challenges (there are three), the other medic barely touched. One trapper has cleared the first star, the other two barely touched. I don't think I have played a single round as support, and maybe two games as assault. So yeah, to say there is a tiny amount of content is both false and misleading. Not to mention completely irrelevant.

Plus progression isn't slow. Just depends on your play style and your skill. What people are used to are games like CoD where in order to unlock something, you just play for awhile to reach a certain level. Or to prestige, you just get enough XP and you're good. Evolve gives you specific challenges for each class ability. Apparently some reviewers and gamers do not like that and want easy XP based progression. And this is only true for the third set of challenges. The one and two star ones are incredibly easy. The third star one adds in team elements. So instead of just getting progress for healing a certain amount of damage, you have to heal a certain amount on multiple teammates. It requires you to actually use your class as you're supposed to.

You can take 10 hours of doing the same thing repeatedly against AI (and a vast majority of the time in a completely scripted manner) I'll take hundreds of hours of new experiences online with other people :) And you might not be setting some mathematical rule for all games, but the guy I quoted was, which you then responded to. Seems we can just agree to disagree.

Really, care? Can you please link me to anything relevant about how you measure the amount of "care" it takes to make a SP game versus a MP focused game? lol.

The rest of that is just your opinion. It takes time to design a MP focused game just like a SP game. And this one has AI of different kinds on every planet, just like a SP game would have different AI. And a SP game might have different levels, this one has different planets. I don't think anyone would disagree that a lot more time has to go into a MP focused title to balance it out. That's just common sense. Can we say that amounts to "care" also? lol.

Time put into making a game is irrelevant to my point anyway. If I get 12 hours of play time out of a SP game, that's not worth $60 to me. That's a $20 game to me. Silly double standard is still silly :)