Splatoon Review Thread - MetaCritic 81% / GameRankings 81.46%

[Mr.Playstation]

sundin13 said:

Mr.Playstation said:

Maybe Nintendo should have been pro-choice and given the whole game at ounce. If players felt like they weren't ready for more complex stuff then they should stick with the easier stuff to hone their skills and advanced players who easily catch on should and would be able to play on more advanced stuff. There is no reason to accept this type of content hiding scheming, none at all and reviewers have every right to lower their score since they are paying $60 now and not next week, they can update the review score later but a bunch of promises by Nintendo that they'll update the game shouldn't stop reviewers from lowring the game's score right now.

Many online games suffer from divided communities or strict adherence to a single mode. A large install base isn't guaranteed, so giving a lot of modes off the bat could make it more difficult to find a game. Additionally, in most online games, the majority of players tend to find a mode they like and stick with it. This strategy gets all players to play all of the modes, which could increase longevity of the game for players and help them to get more out of it.

As I've said before, this is a strategy to increase the game's longevity and keep the community focused, both of which are good things for all players of the game, whether they choose to buy it now or several months down the line. If you personally feel like the game doesn't have enough content to keep you interested despite frequent content updates, then you are free to wait until August when there is more content out, however, if you buy now, you will still get all of that content.

 I personally disagree with your point of view, because games like this aren't meant to last a week, they are meant to last for months. Criticizing a game for implementing a model which could improve longevity just doesnt make any sense to me.

As always when discussing reviews, I try to emphasize that I do not like review scores in general because of issues like this which are extremely subjective. It is perfectly acceptable to discuss these issues in the review, I just do not believe they should be given as much weight as they are because of how subjective they are.

They said they'll udate with some free stages, nothing is set in stone. If Splatoon falls flat on it's face due to sales while they'll probab;y give out those free stages they won't do anything else. Anyways they haven't even stated what this stages will be, it could literally be a room or a long corridor and their respnse on twitter would be #It'sastage #Weneverpromisedabigstage. Adding more content will keep players more intrested for a long time, if not longer than the method Nintedno is implementing right now. It's a well known fact that a gamer will never be more into a game unlike the first week or two ( or until they finish the game, whichever coes first ) he/she buys it. Sure a new map may peek a gamers interest in a game to launch levels but this won't last long and it would die down soon enough. 

@Bolded: The reviewers also feel as if the game doesn't have enough content but unfortunaley they are playing the game now and Nintendo is releasing the game so they'll deducted the score because the game isn't providing enough.

P.S: I can assure you that if Splatoon sells 500K FW ( That's what most people are expecting in terms of sales ) that no matter how much maps Nintendo have planned to release, everyone will be able to find a game easily.