Well the "not enough content" complain tends to be about longevity, so saying that the game lacks content on day 1, but will get more content soon after sort of nullifies that complaint. Because of this, knowing that we I think 9+ new maps and new weapons coming over the next few months as well as 2 new modes etc, the longevity complaint is severely weakened.

Because of that, I think deducting points due to a lack of content is misleading, however, the problem all boils down to the score. Removing a score would solve these complaints, because I do think that they are something worth mentioning in a review, just the weight they are being given is overblown.

However, when talking about scores, I don't think people are asking to add points to the overall score because of things that will be available in the future, I think they are arguing that it doesn't make sense to deduct points (and yes, there is a big difference between the two).

Except parts of Nintendo's release plan could potentially have a negative impact on the longevity of the game. Map rotations for example are a terrible idea... There's very little reason to justify them and it only serves to further restrict the already limited content that exists.

Irrelevant to the point and already answered in earlier posts, but you would know that if you had been paying attention.

How many DLCs must have released before we review what we have? Should we do that for every games from now on? 

Well, if they buy day one, they can read a day one review. And day one review deals with content available on day one.  

Hello, and welcome to the site! Unfortunately, everything I've heard says that forbes is correct: online is one player only, and local is limited two player only.

Well, it looks like the score will end up settling in the middle between my prediction and my own impressions. Not great, but I'm satisfied.

On the other hand, this thread is turning out EXACTLY as I predicted it would. All the useless arguing going on is already becoming just as unbearable as I expected.

Not sure if serious! Things don't magically appear into existence out of nowhere, in this case there's the development process, where the content is currently being planned and created. Camp Triggerfish is likely done though so we can only guess that the reason it's not included is to further extend the game's longevity.

I see. The game is a 10 out of 10. Even if we can't review what's not there yet. Everyone having a different opinion only spit "irrelevent junk".

Am I doing it right?

This only makes any sense if they don't plan on playing the game anymore after day one. Day one buyers likely aren't as influenced by reviews anyway, and are you still implying everyone buys games day one?