Forums

Topic: Splatoon - OT

Posts 1,921 to 1,940 of 14,636

Captain_Toad

Heh, welp this as I've seen a few reviews faulting this game for the lack of content so this IS justifiable.

Was Mariobro4. No, I'm not taking off my backpack...it's important.

Switch Friend Code: SW-1530-1570-5053 | 3DS Friend Code: 3566-2311-3009 | Nintendo Network ID: Mariobro4

Peach64

My copy just arrived from TGC! Going to wait til after work to play it though.

Peach64

jariw

mariovslink62 wrote:

ultraraichu wrote:

mariovslink62 wrote:

Alright, WTF? This game was hyped the heck up and what do you get? You get an incomplete game which, in order to complete it, you have to wait till August. Funny how companies like Activision and EA get criticized for doing this, yet Nintendo doesn't? This game looks VERY disappointing. Either wait till a price drop or until August.

I look at this way, would a large number of people be happy playing a game now and wait for the dlc later, or add it in all at once with the game but delay the release months later. I can tell you one thing, publishers & developers did that earlier in the Wii U life (mainly Nintendo) and the "fan" did not react positive to that.

Besides don't they sometimes charge you money for some of those games?

I would rather delay it. Again I know you pay for stuff like Activision or EA but its still unacceptable. I know we would have to wait, but time flies by, and I would rather have all of my game, then have it completed via DLC. I won't try to convince you not to buy it, but at this moment I would wait for a price drop in my eyes.

Even if Nintendo delayed the launch until August, they would still roll the online-related content out gradually. They try to build a solid user base for an online game for a new IP, on a platform where users are mainly used to single/local gameplay.

If you don't like the content available at the moment, wait until you feel it's worth it. The first Splatoon content updates will probably arrive even before E3. Just be aware that there might still be more content announced after the bigger August update (where the organized team feature arrives).

Edited on by jariw

jariw

Hy8ogen

mariovslink62 wrote:

ultraraichu wrote:

mariovslink62 wrote:

Alright, WTF? This game was hyped the heck up and what do you get? You get an incomplete game which, in order to complete it, you have to wait till August. Funny how companies like Activision and EA get criticized for doing this, yet Nintendo doesn't? This game looks VERY disappointing. Either wait till a price drop or until August.

I look at this way, would a large number of people be happy playing a game now and wait for the dlc later, or add it in all at once with the game but delay the release months later. I can tell you one thing, publishers & developers did that earlier in the Wii U life (mainly Nintendo) and the "fan" did not react positive to that.

Besides don't they sometimes charge you money for some of those games?

I would rather delay it. Again I know you pay for stuff like Activision or EA but its still unacceptable. I know we would have to wait, but time flies by, and I would rather have all of my game, then have it completed via DLC. I won't try to convince you not to buy it, but at this moment I would wait for a price drop in my eyes.

You would rather delay it? You can say that with a straight face because your financial well being does not rest upon how many copies this game sell. It is absolutely ridiculous when gamers say things like this. If it was broken like Battlefield 4, then fine it needs to be delayed. But this game is FAR from being unplayable and Nintendo decide to release it early and patch in content later.

The reason for Nintendo releasing this game early is obvious. They want to rake in as many sales as possible since E3 is arriving. If they release this game on say November, the sales will probably lack in comparison. This is a new IP and they NEED the exposure. If you don't like the fact the game is "incomplete", well I respect that. But not everyone shares your view. However, it is worth mentioning that even with the lack of content on launch, this game is raking in reviews in the range of 75% to 90%.

Personally I'm still debating whether to get this game tomorrow or wait until all the free DLC arrives. Being a Ninty game, patience is usually not paid off (they hardly come down in price). Also call me Stockholm Syndrome, but rolling out free contents like that actually makes me keep playing the game lol

Edited on by Hy8ogen

Nintendo fan since 6 years of age.
Owned: SNES, Gameboy, Gameboy Color, Gameboy Advance, DS, 3DS, Wii U, PS1, PS2, PS3, PS4 and PSP3000.

3DS Friend Code: 5472-8085-9073 | Nintendo Network ID: kkloveit

Grumblevolcano

Hy8ogen wrote:

mariovslink62 wrote:

ultraraichu wrote:

mariovslink62 wrote:

Alright, WTF? This game was hyped the heck up and what do you get? You get an incomplete game which, in order to complete it, you have to wait till August. Funny how companies like Activision and EA get criticized for doing this, yet Nintendo doesn't? This game looks VERY disappointing. Either wait till a price drop or until August.

I look at this way, would a large number of people be happy playing a game now and wait for the dlc later, or add it in all at once with the game but delay the release months later. I can tell you one thing, publishers & developers did that earlier in the Wii U life (mainly Nintendo) and the "fan" did not react positive to that.

Besides don't they sometimes charge you money for some of those games?

I would rather delay it. Again I know you pay for stuff like Activision or EA but its still unacceptable. I know we would have to wait, but time flies by, and I would rather have all of my game, then have it completed via DLC. I won't try to convince you not to buy it, but at this moment I would wait for a price drop in my eyes.

You would rather delay it? You can say that with a straight face because your financial well being does not rest upon how many copies this game sell. It is absolutely ridiculous when gamers say things like this. If it was broken like Battlefield 4, then fine it needs to be delayed. But this game is FAR from being unplayable and Nintendo decide to release it early and patch in content later.

The reason for Nintendo releasing this game early is obvious. They want to rake in as many sales as possible since E3 is arriving. If they release this game on say November, the sales will probably lack in comparison. This is a new IP and they NEED the exposure. If you don't like the fact the game is "incomplete", well I respect that. But not everyone shares your view. However, it is worth mentioning that even with the lack of content on launch, this game is raking in reviews in the range of 75% to 90%.

Personally I'm still debating whether to get this game tomorrow or wait until all the free DLC arrives. Being a Ninty game, patience is usually not paid off (they hardly come down in price). Also call me Stockholm Syndrome, but rolling out free contents like that actually makes me keep playing the game lol

I always felt the reason for releasing it now is because a 6 month game drought is unacceptable. The US have got nothing since Mario Party 10 and assuming Yoshi releases after Mario Maker rather than before then that's a guaranteed 6 month wait for something to come to Wii U.

Grumblevolcano

Switch Friend Code: SW-2595-6790-2897 | 3DS Friend Code: 3926-6300-7087 | Nintendo Network ID: GrumbleVolcano

Nin10dad

At the end of the day, this game has an RRP of £35, making it a budget title. Stop griping about the lack of content. This is reflected in the price. This game is made for online play. Get involved and wind your necks in! End.

nintendad.co.uk

Twitter @nintendad

Switch - SW-5274-3655-0708

PaperMario64

It's not an incomplete game. We all knew this was meant to be an online game and to focus on the campaign is just unreasonable. That Nintendo will release DLC and updates later doesn't make it a bad game! Why can't people be happy we live in a time where developers can give us more contant later on?

Btw does someone know when the game will be available on eShop in Europe?

Edited on by PaperMario64

PaperMario64

Hy8ogen

@G0dlike Not in North America. It's freaking 70CAD, which is £35 I know, but over here that's what we pay for a full on retail release pricing.....

Edited on by Hy8ogen

Nintendo fan since 6 years of age.
Owned: SNES, Gameboy, Gameboy Color, Gameboy Advance, DS, 3DS, Wii U, PS1, PS2, PS3, PS4 and PSP3000.

3DS Friend Code: 5472-8085-9073 | Nintendo Network ID: kkloveit

GrailUK

Hy8ogen wrote:

@G0dlike Not in North America. It's freaking 70CAD, which is £35 I know, but over here that's what we pay for a full on retail release pricing.....

Well it's good to be American then. (Jealousy!)

I never drive faster than I can see. Besides, it's all in the reflexes.

Switch FC: SW-0287-5760-4611

PaperMario64

I don't understand why people are so butthurt over the price. In my country a brand new game can cost up to 70 USD. Which is 88 CAD, 64 EUR or 46 GBP.

Edited on by PaperMario64

PaperMario64

jariw

Hy8ogen wrote:

@G0dlike Not in North America. It's freaking 70CAD, which is £35 I know, but over here that's what we pay for a full on retail release pricing.....

NoA obviously feels that it's easier to push Splatoon as a competitive online game than NoE feels. The NoE market is so segmented, and getting the word out for a competitive online game might be harder. NoE also releases 3 other Wii U games during the same timeframe (probably to increase the "value" of Splatoon for new Wii U owners) although NoE also has long-term marketing campaigns similar to NoA for Splatoon. Some NoE campaigns for Splatoon will not start until a month from now.

Grumblevolcano wrote:

I always felt the reason for releasing it now is because a 6 month game drought is unacceptable. The US have got nothing since Mario Party 10 and assuming Yoshi releases after Mario Maker rather than before then that's a guaranteed 6 month wait for something to come to Wii U.

The Yoshi game is completed now. Art Academy: Atelier is completed now (although that wouldn't probably sell much in the NoA region.) Devil's Third is rumored to be completed since half a year now, just awaiting Nintendo's marketing. The drought might be artificially created by NoA to focus on Splatoon only, similar to what they do in Japan. (Also, it makes more sense to release Devil's Third after Splatoon, once a competitive online community has been established on the Wii U.)

jariw

kkslider5552000

Ok, so I will actually entirely agree that there being another drought on Wii U is silly and Nintendo should feel bad for that. But honestly, AAA gaming is so miserable right now that I don't want them to feel too bad. I just want them to continue to focus on indies right now, and there's been quite a few I want to pick up recently. But I want Wii U to also continue to succeed and having more mainstream relevant games would be appreciated, even if only literally like 2 or 3 of them so far this year have lived up to expectations.

But I am ENTIRELY against the idea of delaying it in this case. No, the way I play games, this is the best format for me and likely the best format for the game. If you want a consistently relevant online game, it is more important to have something 3 months down the road rather than throwing it all out there at once (outside of certain universally and consistently popular games like Smash). And because Nintendo is basically the exclusive developer of retail Wii U games, every game needs as much of that as possible. Also, it's way too late to complain about content. If you bought Mario Kart 8 at full price after the first few months, quite frankly Nintendo ripped you off. My go-to example of short games done right, Sonic Colors, has less content than this game.

I entirely encourage people to not buy games at launch if they don't feel it's worth it. But while it could be backfire, right now I see no reason, from any perspective other than people who want it delayed that will change nothing except them getting the game the same time as other people, to do anything than what they are doing.

Non-binary, demiguy, making LPs, still alive

Megaman Legends 2 Let's Play!:
LeT's PlAy MEGAMAN LEGENDS 2 < Link to LP

luke17

Question!!!: If my wife wants to play online but I don't want her to mess up my ranking, can she have a different profile than me?

luke17

GrailUK

E-Shop's Fables

Once upon a time there was a bloke who wanted to buy Splatoon. He was going to buy it from the e-shop. However, the e-shop has still not been updated and the bloke is reading on forums how good it is. The moral of this tale is do not waste people's time with silly forum posts.

I never drive faster than I can see. Besides, it's all in the reflexes.

Switch FC: SW-0287-5760-4611

TheMONADO36

luke17 wrote:

Question!!!: If my wife wants to play online but I don't want her to mess up my ranking, can she have a different profile than me?

Don't quote me on this but I would imagine it's just a simple case of logging into a different NNID?

I've not been able to crack my disc in yet but my Wii U has a couple of NNID's tied to it so if nobody has answered your question I'll check it out tonight for you.

TheMONADO36

3DS Friend Code: 1306-8212-3438 | Nintendo Network ID: TheMONADO36

mariovslink62

HA HA! I knew it. I knew it. I knew it. When I made my comment I knew a lot of people would just call me out for having an opinion. I am having a self-debate if delaying the game would be good or bad, but congrats to the people who could respect what I said.

Splatoon does remind me of The Order 1886. Both are fun games to play, but lack content. I don't hate Splatoon, but it sucks that there won't be much for me to do and if I want the full game, I gotta wait till August. Nintendo will always have a special place in my heart, but I'm not loyal to them. As a consumer, my job is to find the best job at the lowest price. Nintendo doesn't pay any of you to damage control them. You can call me a hater but I don't care.

DERP

Nintendo Network ID: awesomeface2149

jump

^You can't compare The Order 1886 with Splatoon imo, one is a single player game which is very short of content/game length whilst the other is game designed for multiplayer with more content coming.

Nicolai wrote:

Alright, I gotta stop getting into arguments with jump. Someone remind me next time.

Switch Friend Code: SW-8051-9575-2812 | 3DS Friend Code: 1762-3772-0251

UGXwolf

Lulz. I'm just getting a kick out of people complaining about the lack of content. A five-seven-hour single player campaign with collectibles that can extend the length of the campaign is in this game, and that's not even the primary focus! That's just extra side content. If you wanted the Amiibos you'd also have three separate score cards for challenges that would likely rival or even surpass the length of the single player campaign (though I can understand people complaining about that and wouldn't really count it in with the price of the game since you need to get Amiibos to unlock it.) There's a local multiplayer option, something that shooters these days have been neglecting more and more, not to mention all the gear and equipment you can collect and use and hopefully get good with. Plus five stages for the online multiplayer that are all fun and interesting and all bring different strategies to the table AND free updates to keep you playing throughout the Summer, and you're saying this game doesn't have enough content?!?

Let me ask you this: would you be buttered, if the content they were going to patch in later was on the disc from the start and you unlocked each one by having the game for however long it would've taken them to release it in an update? Effectively it's exactly the same, but odds are that because it was on the disc from the start and not patched in later or put behind a pay wall, you wouldn't be complaining.

See how little sense this makes? You clearly don't have a problem with the price of the update equipment, as it's free, and you really can't complain about free. You don't have a problem with the waiting, since you said yourself you were willing to wait until August, if that's what it took to release the whole game at once. But that's literally the only price you have to pay for the content. It's included in the $60 price tag, you just have to wait for it, and in the meantime, you can play with the rest of the game that's already complete, and as far as we've seen, works beautifully.

Now, if the game were unpolished or buggy or the net code was pathetic and made finding matches nearly impossible (not ruling this out, yet. We won't really know until the game launches to the public.) then I could understand why people might be upset about the "lack of content" but as it stands, there's plenty of content to carry you through until they release more content. And hell, I don't see anyone complaining about Ranked Battles not being available from the start, even though that's essentially the exact same thing as the update content: you have to wait for it after buying the game.

Look, if you still don't think the game is worth the money, even when taking the update content into account, then fine. Don't get it. Just don't expect that it'll be any cheaper in August when you do finally decide it has enough content. The only difference between those of you that waited and those of us that didn't is that those of us that didn't wait will have been playing the game all Summer.

A nifty calendar (Updated 9/13/15)
The UGXloggery ... really needs an update.

Please login or sign up to reply to this topic