By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Nintendo - Splatoon - Nintendo trying to change the DLC formula.

The_Yoda on 09 June 2015
yvanjean said:
Johnw1104 said:
"Nintendo has certaintly struck gold with their latest game Splatoon, Capturing the fun of FPS games without the violence."

There's certainly verbal violence in this apartment; I've lost my temper on occasion when some camping fool hiding under the ink pops up and splats me with a roller for the umpteenth time... Nothing makes me feel sillier than shouting angrily at a game about squid teenagers shooting ink on the floor. :D

But yeah, given how fun the game already is I have no problem with their approach (I kinda like it in fact). If the game felt incomplete and held back I'd not be ok with this, but it gives you something to look forward to as you enjoy what is already available.

I do wonder how much of this is strategy and how much is the result of having to release it early. Probably a bit of both.


That's exactly what's nagging me!! They had more then enough time to add more content to this game before release. If anything this game was delayed, it certaintly wasn't rushed. It's either a marketing strategy or most likely it was a very small team at Nintendo working on this game full time.  

Splatoon in my book doesn't deserve the same retail price has Mario Kart 8, Super Smash bros WiiU & Mario 3D world. Splatoon is more like a Captain Toad Treasure tracker effort. 

On the plus side, if this game sell a bunch of copies at full retail, you can expect more support from future DLC by Nintendo. Could be a win/win for everyone. I just know that i'm going to wait for a price drop or not bother with Splatoon. 

It is a Nintendo title do you honestly expect a price drop in the near future? If I were you I'd wait until August then when most of the "DLC" will have dropped, or buy it used.  It is a fun game, although it may be the death of my gamepad as there have been several times I nearly broke the controller over my knee (frustration with teammates or myself in ranked matches)



Around the Network
Attiq on 09 June 2015
Areym said:
"Opening the market to everyone including younger kids that have always wanted to play FPS but that have strict parents"

Alright, let's calm down. I get it, splatoon is new and exciting and people are enjoying but it isn't really doing much for the shooting genre. Kids have been playing shooters as early as freaking 8 for years, anybody that plays call of duty know that as well as I do. My cousin got call of duty modern warfare 1 when he was 10 or 11 (I was 14 at the time) and I can tell you that parents rarely, RARELY strict their kids from playing the CoD shooters types.

It seems a little overblown that Splatoon, despite higher sales (in Japan) than many nay-sayers expected, is somehow revolutionizing anything in the shooter genre, giving that it was released in a console which A) for all intents and purposes, has the lowest userbase of any current console (including the 3DS and even the freaking PSVita) and B) whose main consumers are already dedicated Nintendo fans, not casual parents and their kids.

Sorry to blow you out of the water but I am a strict parent and I don't let my kids play FPS's and I got Splatoon because I figured it was a good FPS that doesnt depict over the top violence. My kids have NEVER played CoD or Halo or Battlefield or any other FPS. I actually know quite a few people with kids that won't let them play FPS's and are looking at Splatoon with interest.



The_Yoda on 09 June 2015
Attiq said:
Areym said:
"Opening the market to everyone including younger kids that have always wanted to play FPS but that have strict parents"

Alright, let's calm down. I get it, splatoon is new and exciting and people are enjoying but it isn't really doing much for the shooting genre. Kids have been playing shooters as early as freaking 8 for years, anybody that plays call of duty know that as well as I do. My cousin got call of duty modern warfare 1 when he was 10 or 11 (I was 14 at the time) and I can tell you that parents rarely, RARELY strict their kids from playing the CoD shooters types.

It seems a little overblown that Splatoon, despite higher sales (in Japan) than many nay-sayers expected, is somehow revolutionizing anything in the shooter genre, giving that it was released in a console which A) for all intents and purposes, has the lowest userbase of any current console (including the 3DS and even the freaking PSVita) and B) whose main consumers are already dedicated Nintendo fans, not casual parents and their kids.

Sorry to blow you out of the water but I am a strict parent and I don't let my kids play FPS's and I got Splatoon because I figured it was a good FPS that doesnt depict over the top violence. My kids have NEVER played CoD or Halo or Battlefield or any other FPS. I actually know quite a few people with kids that won't let them play FPS's and are looking at Splatoon with interest.

I'll chime in on this part too.  I didn't let my son play anything like that until he became a teen-ager.  He's 14 and I still won't let him play Bayonetta.



pokoko on 09 June 2015

The question is, are consumers fine with publishers/developers carving up a game, charging full price for a portion of that game at release, then feeding that content back to them at a pace controlled by the publisher/developer?

The answer seems to be "yes". I have no doubt that other publishers/developers are looking at the positive reaction here with interest.

This, if accepted by gamers, will allow publishers/developers to release an unfinished game much quicker than normal, then allow them to keep interest in that game going by feeding new content back when it appears interest is waning. That's an absolute dream situation, especially for a platform-holder with release gaps to fill.



d21lewis on 09 June 2015

I just want to say that Plants vs Zombies: Garden Warfare is a thing.



Around the Network
pokoko on 09 June 2015
d21lewis said:
I just want to say that Plants vs Zombies: Garden Warfare is a thing.

but .. but ..

You are SUCH a bully!

Edit:  Be a Star, dude. 



midrange on 09 June 2015
The_Yoda said:
midrange said:

Well, in order to have an unbiased valuation of a game, we have to have a certain standard to the games we play. If most $60 games have voice chat, is it fair to pay $60 for another game that does not have voice chat. If most $60 games have customizable online games, is it fair to pay $60 for a game that does not. If most $60 games have a heavily packed local multiplayer mode, is it fair to pay $60 for a game that does not. The paintball gameplay seems like a mode that call of duty could implement for $10 rather than a fully fledged $60 title.

While it is true that you may have spent 80 hours in splatoon and 10 in far cry, I may have spent 10 hours in splatoon and and 80 hours in far cry (obviously these numbers are not real). However your experience does not warrant splatoon to be an $80 game, and my experience does not warrant it to be a $10 game. So the best way to actually price it, is by comparing it to the features of other similar titles that are actually $60 (or $40 or $20 ... you get the idea)


Does it make it easier to swallow knowing that you will be getting more contenet without added cost something the $60 games you are talking about don't do?  How many COD continually give you free new maps and free new modes?  It is a different delivery system so we will have to wait and see in the end how much content you get for $60 before you can really draw comparisons on content.  I could say the only shooter that is worth $60 is COD because none of the other games out there feature a Zombies mode.

Well, they are adding content that should have been in the start to begin with. What Nintendo should have done is release the game at $20-$40 and $60 for a season pass (or as a legendary edition later on that adds in all the dlc like skyrim). There is no point in paying in full when you don't have the full game presented to you.

No, it is not often that cod gives out free maps, but then again there is no need for them to have to since they launch the game with around 15 maps. Same with the modes. Literally, the zombies mode in bo2 has 4 modes to enjoy in both local and online play, splatoon does not have that many modes in its entirety

Destiny is a game that trades the zombies mode for the ability to do raids with friends and trades the local play for a class system with distinct subclasses and skill trees, along with certain equipment, that is not present in call of duty. That is a game that should be $60. Halo 4 gives up the zombies mode, but otherwise contains a very good campaign that is somewhat lacking in call of duty. That is a game that should be $60. Splatoon is a game that gives up voice chat, customizable online matches, local multiplayer (aside from balloon popping), a zombies or raid features, and a number of maps and guns, for a colorful atmosphere, a squid form (that only makes you move faster and semi invisible), and paint instead of bullets. That does not sound like a game that should be $60.



midrange on 09 June 2015
The_Yoda said:
Attiq said:
Areym said:
"Opening the market to everyone including younger kids that have always wanted to play FPS but that have strict parents"

Alright, let's calm down. I get it, splatoon is new and exciting and people are enjoying but it isn't really doing much for the shooting genre. Kids have been playing shooters as early as freaking 8 for years, anybody that plays call of duty know that as well as I do. My cousin got call of duty modern warfare 1 when he was 10 or 11 (I was 14 at the time) and I can tell you that parents rarely, RARELY strict their kids from playing the CoD shooters types.

It seems a little overblown that Splatoon, despite higher sales (in Japan) than many nay-sayers expected, is somehow revolutionizing anything in the shooter genre, giving that it was released in a console which A) for all intents and purposes, has the lowest userbase of any current console (including the 3DS and even the freaking PSVita) and B) whose main consumers are already dedicated Nintendo fans, not casual parents and their kids.

Sorry to blow you out of the water but I am a strict parent and I don't let my kids play FPS's and I got Splatoon because I figured it was a good FPS that doesnt depict over the top violence. My kids have NEVER played CoD or Halo or Battlefield or any other FPS. I actually know quite a few people with kids that won't let them play FPS's and are looking at Splatoon with interest.

I'll chime in on this part too.  I didn't let my son play anything like that until he became a teen-ager.  He's 14 and I still won't let him play Bayonetta.

I hope you guys realize that a game being an fps does not make a game dark and gritty like CoD or Halo. Take Portal 2 (valve), destiny (activision) or the upcoming Overwatch (blizzard) as popular examples. Splatoon really should not be the first fps for a 14 year old interested in the fps genre considering there are other appropriate classics



The_Yoda on 09 June 2015
midrange said:
The_Yoda said:


Does it make it easier to swallow knowing that you will be getting more contenet without added cost something the $60 games you are talking about don't do?  How many COD continually give you free new maps and free new modes?  It is a different delivery system so we will have to wait and see in the end how much content you get for $60 before you can really draw comparisons on content.  I could say the only shooter that is worth $60 is COD because none of the other games out there feature a Zombies mode.

Well, they are adding content that should have been in the start to begin with. What Nintendo should have done is release the game at $20-$40 and $60 for a season pass (or as a legendary edition later on that adds in all the dlc like skyrim). There is no point in paying in full when you don't have the full game presented to you.

No, it is not often that cod gives out free maps, but then again there is no need for them to have to since they launch the game with around 15 maps. Same with the modes. Literally, the zombies mode in bo2 has 4 modes to enjoy in both local and online play, splatoon does not have that many modes in its entirety

Destiny is a game that trades the zombies mode for the ability to do raids with friends and trades the local play for a class system with distinct subclasses and skill trees, along with certain equipment, that is not present in call of duty. That is a game that should be $60. Halo 4 gives up the zombies mode, but otherwise contains a very good campaign that is somewhat lacking in call of duty. That is a game that should be $60. Splatoon is a game that gives up voice chat, customizable online matches, local multiplayer (aside from balloon popping), a zombies or raid features, and a number of maps and guns, for a colorful atmosphere, a squid form (that only makes you move faster and semi invisible), and paint instead of bullets. That does not sound like a game that should be $60.

Until all the FREE DLC is out you can't really draw comparisons to the number of maps and modes.  If it were paid DLC I would completely agree, not worth $60.  Do I miss voice chat ... not really, I rarely use it in other games as the majority of users are little kids that have to make noise constantly.  That said I still think (as I've expressed before) that it should have been an included option that was tied to the parental controlles of the user. I also think of it this way, this is the first entry in the series, I think it will catch up to the others in it's genre within a few releases where features are concerned.

If their is no need of more maps in COD games why do they make them? If there is no need then there should be no market.  I think Nintendo is trying to keep the game fresh and so they are dribbling out content. It is simialr to the way most of the other shooters do it only they charge you along the way to keep the game from getting stale. I'd guess if you bought all the available DLC you will end up paying $100+ for most of the other shooters out there where when it is all said and done you will get a smiliar amount of content from Splatoon as you did from the other games you mentioned at launch.

Ultimately value is determined by the person making the purchase, was it a good value or a poor one.  For me it is a decent value, for you not so much it sounds like. Kind of hard to make that determination though if you haven't played it.



Attiq on 09 June 2015
midrange said:
The_Yoda said:
Attiq said:
Areym said:
"Opening the market to everyone including younger kids that have always wanted to play FPS but that have strict parents"

Alright, let's calm down. I get it, splatoon is new and exciting and people are enjoying but it isn't really doing much for the shooting genre. Kids have been playing shooters as early as freaking 8 for years, anybody that plays call of duty know that as well as I do. My cousin got call of duty modern warfare 1 when he was 10 or 11 (I was 14 at the time) and I can tell you that parents rarely, RARELY strict their kids from playing the CoD shooters types.

It seems a little overblown that Splatoon, despite higher sales (in Japan) than many nay-sayers expected, is somehow revolutionizing anything in the shooter genre, giving that it was released in a console which A) for all intents and purposes, has the lowest userbase of any current console (including the 3DS and even the freaking PSVita) and B) whose main consumers are already dedicated Nintendo fans, not casual parents and their kids.

Sorry to blow you out of the water but I am a strict parent and I don't let my kids play FPS's and I got Splatoon because I figured it was a good FPS that doesnt depict over the top violence. My kids have NEVER played CoD or Halo or Battlefield or any other FPS. I actually know quite a few people with kids that won't let them play FPS's and are looking at Splatoon with interest.

I'll chime in on this part too.  I didn't let my son play anything like that until he became a teen-ager.  He's 14 and I still won't let him play Bayonetta.

I hope you guys realize that a game being an fps does not make a game dark and gritty like CoD or Halo. Take Portal 2 (valve), destiny (activision) or the upcoming Overwatch (blizzard) as popular examples. Splatoon really should not be the first fps for a 14 year old interested in the fps genre considering there are other appropriate classics


And I hope you realise what you might deem "appropriate" that I do not. This the beauty of us not all being clones of each other but instead we are individuals. I think that Splatoon is a perfect step for kids interested in FPS.