Sharu said:
Mummelmann said:
No I don't, and that's not my point. I don't need to own it to dislike the strategy of releasing one map, one weapon and one new mode after four days in response to complaints about low content at launch. This is a general statement that many agree with; many developers release games with low content and I don't approve of it, especially for bigger budget productions from great developers.
My gripe is with the argument that it is a pro-active stance to "keep interest" in the title, when this makes zero sense after 4 days and they might as well have packed the extra content with the game from launch.
I'm not talking about the feelings of those who have played spefically (although, if you read reviews, you would see that this is a view shared by most of them), I'm talking about the fact that I think it's ridiculous to withhold content from launch only to release a small bit after only 4 days, seems more like a mockery than a fan service and there is absolutely no sound reasoning for why this content wasn't available at launch.
It's not a huge deal when all is said and done, and I'm glad people are enjoying it, but this is my opinion of a solution that I think is unfair to gamers and customers (and reviewers). Reviewers complained about lack of content (rightly so, the amount of customization alone is grounds for that imo); content that was clearly already good to go releases four days after launch. It's shooting yourself in the foot and disrespectful to the customer.
Like I've said; a larger update after a month or a few weeks would be one thing; one weapon, one mode and one map after four days is a complete mockery and has nothing to do with "keeping interest" in the title, in my opinion.
Edit; since when are we not allowed to have opinions on games we do not own? That's a huge part of the discussions on these boards. And I'm not "punishing" Nintendo for "being different"; I'm commenting on a practice I deem unfair, just like I do with all the other unfair practices by other developers in here (I'm known as one of the biggest critics of the industry on the whole site).
|
So your complaints are purely theoretical, yes?
|
They are complaints over a practice I don't approve of, just like my complaints over titles like Assassin's Creed: Unity (that I do not own), Driveclub (that I do not own), GTA V Online (that I have never played), Sim City 4 (that I do not own), Diablo III (that I stopped playing due to annoyances surrounding design choices and always online), and dozens of other titles, most of which I never owned.
Most users discuss titles they don't own, almost on a daily basis, why is Splatoon excempt from this discussion?
So, I ask again, are we to stop discussing games and/or business practices if we don't own the product? I don't own any Apple products either but I feel like I have the right to express my displeasure at their closed business models and unfair treatment of 3rd parties.
