Support NeoGAF

[danm999]

Your game gets reviewed for its launch content and quality. If you're concerned about review scores hold it back. If you're not and you want to get it out there early for people who want it, go for it.

If your game is big enough or popular enough, and the changes are deemed substantial enough, you might get a second look from a reviewer months down the track, but I'm guessing most sites/publications don't have the time.

 

[prag16]

I doubt it'll be a big deal. It'll be handled like any other game heavy on post launch content.

I'm just annoyed partying isn't possible. I know the August update will partially address that, but one of main things I was looking forward to for this game was partying up with 1 or 2 friends, and jumping into matches with randoms (WITH THE THREE OF US ON THE SAME TEAM). Can't do that AT ALL at launch. In August it'll be sort of possible, but mandatory to have FOUR people on your team before you can go into matchmaking.

Very very disappointing. Yes, yes, I know, in the Direct thread I said something along these lines and got dogpiled by people saying they're fine with it and it's no big deal, etc.

But it's a big deal to a lot of people, including the people I'll be playing with. A couple of them may not even get the game now. It's an extremely legitimate complaint.

 

[Shaanyboi]

lol that doesn't count?
My friend and I can still play in the same match together. The way its done in Splatoon just isn't very good and it sucks but I'm still playing with my friend.

Except you miss all the benefits of playing with friends. Someone communicating/laughing with people your comfortable with. What, am I supposed to be texting them this whole time?

 

[Gucci Messiah]

Honestly, I was going to buy the game back when there was just 1 map and 1 weapon, so I'm clearly biased here.



Nintendo aren't vaguely promising anything, they've downright pledged content support and have been entirely transparant about the whole thing.

Also no, I wouldn't slam any team shooter for its design choices before launch. If the new Call of Duty had 5 great maps, and was explicitly designed around wordless communication between random players, and played well, I'd actually applaud it. I refuse to judge a game based solely on the things its contemporaries say it is supposed to be.

Did Nintendo detail how many maps would be coming later and an exact date or did they just say 'we'll release additional maps sometime in August lol" because if it's the latter, then that is what we call a vague promise. I'm not putting on my tinfoil hat and speculating that the free content is a scam and will never come out, I'm just saying that we don't know what we're getting, how much, and when.

This isn't a design choice; no publisher purposely says "hey ya know what would be great? releasing a barebones multiplayer experience for our new IP and then slowly rolling out content later on" unless the game is being rushed due to a lack of software on the platform which seems to be the case here. Like, I really can't believe you tried to defend this as a choice that somehow makes the game more fun. Your opening sentence admitted how biased you are though so maybe I shouldn't have been surprised.

 

[『Inaba Resident』]

Except you miss all the benefits of playing with friends. Someone communicating/laughing with people your comfortable with. What, am I supposed to be texting them this whole time?

I'm not arguing that it isn't missing features that should be present when playing with friends.
You can still play with friends, just not in any optimal way.

 

[Zombie James]

Did Nintendo detail how many maps would be coming later and an exact date or did they just say 'we'll release additional maps sometime in August lol" because if it's the latter, then that is what we call a vague promise. I'm not putting on my tinfoil hat and speculating that the free content is a scam and will never come out, I'm just saying that we don't know what we're getting, how much, and when.

This isn't a design choice; no publisher purposely says "hey ya know what would be great? releasing a barebones multiplayer experience for our new IP and then slowly rolling out content later on" unless the game is being rushed due to a lack of software on the platform which seems to be the case here. Like, I really can't believe you tried to defend this as a choice that somehow makes the game more fun. Your opening sentence admitted how biased you are though so maybe I shouldn't have been surprised.

It definitely sounds like it's being rushed before it's ready and I really have no clue why some are defending this, or at least saying it's not a big deal. If it were any other publisher it most definitely would be a big deal, and rightfully so.

 

[Vena]

Did Nintendo detail how many maps would be coming later and an exact date or did they just say 'we'll release additional maps sometime in August lol" because if it's the latter, then that is what we call a vague promise. I'm not putting on my tinfoil hat and speculating that the free content is a scam and will never come out, I'm just saying that we don't know what we're getting, how much, and when.

As far as the direct is concerned, the details are eight or nine maps through June to August. The content update in August adding in the feature set for custom lobbies/load-outs with new weapons, equipment, and the two modes. Splatfests happen randomly as they are run by someone on the other end of the line, and the first is at the end of June.

So either we're getting the maps in chunks in June, July, August, or something like a bi-weekly release schedule.

It definitely sounds like it's being rushed before it's ready and I really have no clue why some are defending this, or at least saying it's not a big deal. If it were any other publisher it most definitely would be a big deal, and rightfully so.

This is the state the game as was written about for release in the recent EDGE article. So... its apparently been getting rushed out in this state for over two months now. The more likely conclusion is that what is being shipped is what was reasonably planned for release by May. They can't delay the game for more because that would miss the ideal release window for the title given the clear demographic that its targeting. Neither Nintendo nor the developers have ever promised more than that come release, so nothing has actually changed from what we've known for a long time now. This would indicate that this release and its state has been planned for several months if not longer.

 

[Jigorath]

I doubt it. GTAV didn't even have GTA Online when it launched and pretty much every review I read completely ignored that the online functionality was incomplete, or at the very least didn't care, because the game got great reviews almost across the board. I don't remember there being much, if any backlash on forums either.

GTAV launched with an utterly massive single player mode and the multiplayer was only two weeks away. Not a reasonable comparison.

 

[nampad]

Sounds like they're launching an unfinished game to me.

I agree but it's a Nintendo game so some people of course call for special treatment.

 

[plebegamer]

I actually don't really get all the hate.

I think what they're doing is great for their audience, in theory. They're obviously aiming at children and those who likely aren't playing CoD. They probably aren't expecting a massive amount of people to pick up any game on the Wii U, because it's the frickin' Wii U, especially not a new IP without Mario crutching it. They don't want to spread the user base thin and they don't want the possibility of some experienced fps team showing up to drop turds on kids every match at launch.

Arguably, they have less faith in their game than they want to admit, but they have to deal with it because their release schedule so far for this year has been an absolute train wreck, and they really need this to work out.

If you're going to respond to me, then please answer this: How is this half-potato release schedule any different than pre-ordering the game for August? None, other than the fact you get to play the game two months early. Since when is playing some game better than playing no game? If you're one of those "I'd rather have nothing!" crowd, there's an option for you too: Have nothing.



Disclaimer: Controversial Personal Preference Incoming

The lack of voice chat is annoying I guess, but I never use in-game/console voice chat, because I live in 2015 and play with people also from my time period, where we have Skype, which is superior in every facet. I guess if I actually wanted to talk to strangers I wish would drown in their own saliva, or was one of those strangers I hoped would drown in their own saliva, I would be let down by this lack of voice chat, but I'm not because I live in 2015, with friends, and Skype.

 

[n0razi]

funny how driveclub gets roasted for this and this game gets a pass since its nintendo

 

[Crayolan]

Did Nintendo detail how many maps would be coming later and an exact date or did they just say 'we'll release additional maps sometime in August lol" because if it's the latter, then that is what we call a vague promise. I'm not putting on my tinfoil hat and speculating that the free content is a scam and will never come out, I'm just saying that we don't know what we're getting, how much, and when.

This isn't a design choice; no publisher purposely says "hey ya know what would be great? releasing a barebones multiplayer experience for our new IP and then slowly rolling out content later on" unless the game is being rushed due to a lack of software on the platform which seems to be the case here. Like, I really can't believe you tried to defend this as a choice that somehow makes the game more fun. Your opening sentence admitted how biased you are though so maybe I shouldn't have been surprised.

Here's what they showed:

3 screenshots of "new" (probably already completed) maps and 6 empty squares, so people are presuming there will be 9 DLC maps total.

They said they'd be releasing them over time, mentioning this before bringing up the specific date of August.

 

[phanphare]

funny how driveclub gets roasted for this and this game gets a pass since its nintendo

did you read the thread?

all this talk about free passes and perceived double standards, meanwhile we're on page 12 of a thread mostly roasting Nintendo for their questionable choices with the content roll-out of Splatoon.

edit: page 13 ;p

 

[GustyGardens]

If you're going to respond to me, then please answer this: How is this half-potato release schedule any different than pre-ordering the game for August? None, other than the fact you get to play the game two months early. Since when is playing some game better than playing no game? If you're one of those "I'd rather have nothing!" crowd, there's an option for you too: Have nothing.

Please, don't bring logic into this. Some of these people complaining are also the people that see no problem with buying a 40$ Season Pass for a game that's a year away.

 

[Hugstable]

funny how driveclub gets roasted for this and this game gets a pass since its nintendo

lol what the heck, this is not the reason Driveclub was roasted

 

[Star Falcon]

Review the game as it is on launch. IIRC the new Killer Instinct game got marked down mainly due to lack of content at launch - double standards to not be consistent.

 

[enanogrande]

I don't think reviews should be updated after every patch, but I do think large changes merit taking another look at things. As a consumer, I don't care what a game was like at launch if I'm looking to buy it six months after the fact.

The problem of course is that things like this can be easily abused by publishers, knowing (assuming) that their games will eventually get a good score no matter what level of completion they ship with. It also allows for some weird situations like the Polygon/Sim City fiasco. In the end though I think the most important thing for a review is helping the consumer make a choice about whether or not a game is worth their money, and the only way to do that is to assess the reality of the game at the moment it is being bought, not at the moment it launched.

 

[danm999]

funny how driveclub gets roasted for this and this game gets a pass since its nintendo

Seems like most of GAF is saying "nope" to both getting to change their review scores IIRC.

 

[Bluth54]

Killzone? When?

And it was shitty when Driveclub did it (and also indicative of a company that clearly wasn't capable of delivering)

And isn't TF2 free? Big difference there

TF2 was part of the Orange Box when it first came out that cost $50, I believe it was also sold separately for $30. It launched with only 6 maps, though since then Valve has added over 60 maps to the game all for free.

 

[Ninjimbo]

I've spent $60 on games with even less content and didn't regret my purchase (shameless Vanquish fan here!). Anyone saying they won't buy the game because of how Nintendo Is deciding to roll out FREE content probably never really wanted the game in the first place. This isn't a big deal.

People complaining about only getting five maps is kind of ridiculous too. Most of the people that play shooters are happy getting a few rounds in on one or two maps. Hell, I've spent dozens of hours on Destiny's multiplayer killing people on the same three maps and it still manages to be fun. If the map is good, you won't mind playing it. If the gameplay is really good, you won't get tired of the map. You'll get a lot of good hours out of that.

 

[Gonzo The Great]

funny how driveclub gets roasted for this and this game gets a pass since its nintendo

Honestly, I don't think this is the case. Most people I've talked to are disappointed by these latest developments, so Nintendo certainly isn't getting a free pass. There are a vocal group of about 5-10 people on this site who defend every decision the company makes, but they aren't reflective of the site at large. Overall, I'm still looking forward to the game, but not being able to host my own private room at launch is very disappointing. Even Mario Kart DS wasn't this barebones.

 

[NotLiquid]

Here's what they showed:


3 screenshots of "new" (probably already completed) maps and 6 empty squares, so people are presuming there will be 9 DLC maps total.

They said they'd be releasing them over time, mentioning this before bringing up the specific date of August.

I imagine August is more than likely when all the hinted DLC maps will have rolled out. Due to the way it was worded at least in the Europe Direct, it seems like they'll space out a couple of maps per every other week or so. It would line up well with the summer release schedule.

Considering they mentioned the planning of several Major other Update events it'd be great to imagine that they have several "waves" of stages planned that lead up to a larger event, like TF2.

 

[Jigorath]

Please, don't bring logic into this. Some of these people complaining are also the people that see no problem with buying a 40$ Season Pass for a game that's a year away.

A season pass is for added DLC to a finished game. This is basically buying a game half-finished with the expectation that Nintendo will release the rest of the game later. I'm not really sure how it compares to a season pass. If you want to compare it to something it should be Steam Early Access.

 

[Vena]

A season pass is for added DLC to a finished game. This is basically buying a game half-finished with the expectation that Nintendo will release the rest of the game later. I'm not really sure how it compares to a season pass. If you want to compare it to something it should be Steam Early Access.

Season pass for a game that isn't released is a finished game? Come again?

 

[Broritos]

Maybe at the end of the year they'll add voice chat.

 

[Jigorath]

Season pass for a game that isn't released is a finished game? Come again?

I... what?

Do you need an example? Let's say you buy Arkham Knight for $60. For that price you get the full game at launch. Then you buy the season pass for $40. Now you get all the DLC whenever it releases. How does this compare to Splatoon?

 

[Mihael Mello Keehl]

I... what?

Do you need an example? Let's say you buy Arkham Knight for $60. For that price you get the full game at launch. Then you buy the season pass for $40. Now you get all the DLC whenever it releases. How does this compare to Splatoon?

Cause that 40$ could be in the full game if they wanted it to instead of rushing the game out.

 

[OrbitalBeard]

The existence of 3 cheap 8-bit minigames that you can't play because you don't want to buy some figures is "extremely troubling" to you? Really?

Yes it's troubling to me, because it shows that in-game Amiibo functionality is going to continue to creep towards truly meaningful content that is locked behind the figures, instead of basic bonuses like costumes.

And I'm buying all three Splatoon Amiibo as soon as I can find them. I collect Amiibo figures and enjoy them quite a bit but this sets a really bad precedent that started with Mario Party 10.

 

[Vena]

I... what?

Do you need an example? Let's say you buy Arkham Knight for $60. For that price you get the full game at launch. Then you buy the season pass for $40. Now you get all the DLC whenever it releases. How does this compare to Splatoon?

This is the very thing you are crying about Splatoon doing... just that this one costs 40$ and is called a Season Pass. I may as well just say that Batman is only half finished and now they're charging me, long before the release of the game, for the rest of the game in the form of a Season Pass.

 

[Jigorath]

Cause that 40$ could be in the full game if they wanted it to instead of rushing the game out.

That makes zero sense.

This is the very thing you are crying about Splatoon doing... just that this one costs 40$ and is called a Season Pass. I may as well just say that Batman is only half finished and now they're charging me, long before the release of the game, for the rest of the game in the form of a Season Pass.

No it isn't. A season pass for future DLC is not the same thing as releasing a half finished game and doling out the rest of the content later. No matter how much you spin this the comparison is never going to make sense.

 

[Herman Cain]

What's the embargo end date?

 

[GustyGardens]

A season pass is for added DLC to a finished game. This is basically buying a game half-finished with the expectation that Nintendo will release the rest of the game later. I'm not really sure how it compares to a season pass. If you want to compare it to something it should be Steam Early Access.

Arkham Knight is finished? Battlefront? Heck, I have been buying Battlefield Premium before the game was finished

I'm not saying that Splatoon is perfect, I certainly have my qualms with it, but to call it unfinished seems like hyperbole. Then again, thus is the foundation of the gaming community.

Also, let me add that if you buy Arkham Knight there's a 100 percent chance that there will be Day 1 DLC. Why couldn't this be put in the game?

 

[phanphare]

What's the embargo end date?

probably about a week before the game releases if prior Nintendo embargoes are anything to go by

 

[Archaix]

Arkham Knight is finished? Battlefront? Heck, I have been buying Battlefield Premium before the game was finished

I'm not saying that Splatoon is perfect, I certainly have my qualms with it, but to call it unfinished seems like hyperbole. Then again, thus is the foundation of the gaming community.

You can't play as a party in a team based multiplayer game.

That's as unfinished as it gets.

 

[plebegamer]

Yes it's troubling to me, because it shows that in-game Amiibo functionality is going to continue to creep towards truly meaningful content that is locked behind the figures, instead of basic bonuses like costumes.

And I'm buying all three Splatoon Amiibo as soon as I can find them. I collect Amiibo figures and enjoy them quite a bit but this sets a really bad precedent that started with Mario Party 10.

At least Mario Party 10 was cheaper by the price of an amiibo to compensate for an amiibo locked mode.

I don't mind minigames, costumes, cosmetic weapons (Spinner), etc locked behind amiibo. I am annoyed that it sounds like there's a good chunk of amiibo missions locked behind them for Splatoon though.

 

[Shaanyboi]

funny how driveclub gets roasted for this and this game gets a pass since its nintendo

uhhh DriveClub got roasted because it was fucking broken. And for a long-ass time too.

 

[Vena]

I am annoyed that it sounds like there's a good chunk of amiibo missions locked behind them for Splatoon though.

Those are the least worrying if anything, its just the single-player levels with random conditions.

 

[GustyGardens]

You can't play as a party in a team based multiplayer game.

That's as unfinished as it gets.

This is also one of my complaints, but I wouldn't call it unfinished. Assassins Creed Unity was unfinished. That game had plenty of features, but most were buggy or didn't work and I loved that game.

Maybe we have different definitions of unfinished.

 

[Junahu]

This isn't a design choice; no publisher purposely says "hey ya know what would be great? releasing a barebones multiplayer experience for our new IP and then slowly rolling out content later on" unless the game is being rushed due to a lack of software on the platform which seems to be the case here.

You can't draw a common thread through all of the content that's being held back?
The stages being added later are advanced stages. The ranking mode is being locked until enough players become proficient at the game. A solid team-matching system with friends allows for advanced coherant strategies that can be developed and tweaked. The additional modes are inherently focused around team synergy. Even Splatfests, the most basic of us-versus-them contests, a mode that is already IN the base game, is waiting on the end of the month before starting.

All of these are elements that encourage competition, and they are all being deliberately held back in order to control the early-game experience and gauge player behaviour. You're free to hate this, of course, but it doesn't stop this from being a deliberate choice.

Like, I really can't believe you tried to defend this as a choice that somehow makes the game more fun. Your opening sentence admitted how biased you are though so maybe I shouldn't have been surprised.

Indeed I am biased. I won't run from that. I've played the game and I already know it's worth my time and money, this is why my position is biased. To me, even the most barebones experience with these mechanics will be worth the entry fee.

Also I didn't say that I think a gradual release schedule is a good idea. I said that games should be judged by what they are, and not by the standards of the genre they occupy.

 

[Jigorath]

Arkham Knight is finished? Battlefront? Heck, I have been buying Battlefield Premium before the game was finished

I'm not saying that Splatoon is perfect, I certainly have my qualms with it, but to call it unfinished seems like hyperbole. Then again, thus is the foundation of the gaming community.

5 maps at launch. One mode. No private matches. If you don't consider that an unfinished game at launch, well I don't know what else I can say.

Also, let me add that if you buy Arkham Knight there's a 100 percent chance that there will be Day 1 DLC. Why couldn't this be put in the game?

It should be put into the game. I hate Day 1 DLC. Pointing at other publishers and going "see they do bad things too!" isn't exactly helping your case though.

 

[TI82]

Judging by this thread the direct did far more harm than good for this game. Yikes.

 

[Vena]

No it isn't. A season pass for future DLC is not the same thing as releasing a half finished game and doling out the rest of the content later. No matter how much you spin this the comparison is never going to make sense.

This is a season pass that was announced before the game launched.

Do you really think there isn't content in there that could have been in the game? By your very own reasoning, they are selling you a half finished game and then the rest later as DLC because its all known about long before launch. Batman was a terrible example for you to use because it is a shitty case of exactly the worst way to handle this, especially since it contains content that is story/lore related.

Judging by this thread the direct did far more harm than good for this game. Yikes.

Then I would recommend reading the actual thread about the Direct. This thread isn't even technically about the game but about the Metacritic score.

 

[TI82]

This is a season pass that was announced before the game launched.

Do you really think there isn't content in there that could have been in the game? By your very own reasoning, they are selling you a half finished game and then the rest later as DLC because its all known about long before launch. Batman was a terrible example for you to use because it is a shitty case of exactly the worst way to handle this, especially since it contains content that is story/lore related.



Then I would recommend reading the actual thread about the Direct. This thread isn't even technically about the game but about the Metacritic score.

I'm in that thread too. Lots of fighting about the game and if it's a ripoff. controls, etc. Just all around a mess.

But it would have been even worse if this stuff was kept under wraps until launch. God, can you imagine the horror?

 

[Vena]

I'm in that thread too. Lots of fighting about the game and if it's a ripoff. controls, etc. Just all around a mess.

Only in the last handful of pages (as most of the positive discussion, rather obviously, was said and done, controversy is what lasts/draws attention), and controls is an entirely different discussion of preference, and doesn't the game allow you to use thumb-sticks over gyro anyway? (The need to use the gamepad is entirely due to the warp design, which you can't really do otherwise.) The bigger points of contention are on content and Amiibos, and the former isn't even much of a controversy over the contents but over their timing of release.

But it would have been even worse if this stuff was kept under wraps until launch. God, can you imagine the horror?

Transparency is good. That's the point of these Directs aside from drumming up interest.

 

[GustyGardens]

5 maps at launch. One mode. No private matches. If you don't consider that an unfinished game at launch, well I don't know what else I can say.


It should be put into the game. I hate Day 1 DLC. Pointing at other publishers and going "see they do bad things too!" isn't exactly helping your case though.

I don't consider that to be unfinished, I just consider that to be a lack if content. As I mentioned earlier, I think I may have a different idea of unfinished. Should reviewers take the lack of content into consideration? Most definitely, I never made a case in favor of anything else.

I would love to have team matches, voice chat and private lobbies. I'm used to those things in other games, but is it a deal breaker? Not really. I still think the game looks cool.

The reason I bring up other companies is because it's easy to get caught up in the hype and people can forget that these kinds of things have been commonplace in our community for a long time now.

 

[plebegamer]

No it isn't. A season pass for future DLC is not the same thing as releasing a half finished game and doling out the rest of the content later. No matter how much you spin this the comparison is never going to make sense.

You're really missing it hard.

They are carving stuff out of Arkham Knight and selling it to you for $40 extra, and doing this a year ahead of release. Then unlocking the full game over time.

At least Splatoon isn't selling you part of a game for $60 and selling you the rest of it for $40. They're selling you an entire game that arrives in installments lol.

 

[bobawesome]

I really doubt most reviewers will bother looking back on a title like this.

Your title gets reviewed for what it has to offer on day one. Too bad, so sad.

 

[TI82]

Transparency is good. That's the point of these Directs aside from drumming up interest.

I agree. I'm just imaging if they tried to hide this information until launch. Reviews would be scathing. I think some sites are still going to rip this game apart now but we will see.

 

[Vena]

I agree. I'm just imaging if they tried to hide this information until launch. Reviews would be scathing. I think some sites are still going to rip this game apart now but we will see.

No need to imagine. Destiny already came out.

 

[Jigorath]

This is a season pass that was announced before the game launched.

Do you really think there isn't content in there that could have been in the game? By your very own reasoning, they are selling you a half finished game and then the rest later as DLC because its all known about long before launch. Batman was a terrible example for you to use because it is a shitty case of exactly the worst way to handle this, especially since it contains content that is story/lore related.

No they aren't. If Splatoon was a complete game at launch with a season pass for future DLC then you could compare the two, as it stands the two concepts are nothing alike. I feel like I'm shouting at a wall at this point. Splatoon is a multiplayer-centric game launching with 5 maps, one mode, no voice chat, and no private matches. You have to wait for the rest of the content to be released. Buying an unfinished game at launch is not the same thing as purchasing a season pass to get future DLC for a finished game at launch You have not made a single reasonable argument that the two are even remotely comparable.