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

Forums - Nintendo - Mario Maker update removes 9 day wait period!

So they patch a problem with Mario Maker before the game even releases, but still haven't fixed obvious issues with Splatoon. Nintendo you continue to make no sense!



Around the Network
Samus Aran said:
Nuvendil said:
aceburg0413 said:
So, are the reviewers of the game that used that as an excuse to complain going to modify their review?

Most probably won't since the Metacritic scores won't change so most won't notice the change :P

But reviewers yet to review the game won't have that excuse to use.

Look at the latest review added on metacritic.

The patch only just went live; I am sure (or at least I hope) the review wasn't based on less than a day with the game (that review was probably written a couple days ago and then submitted for editing and then published today).  And they are using a review code, not a retail release so not sure how patches work there if at all.  The post-launch reviews will be most effected since they will be intentionally playing what consumers will.  



Nuvendil said:
Samus Aran said:
Nuvendil said:
aceburg0413 said:
So, are the reviewers of the game that used that as an excuse to complain going to modify their review?

Most probably won't since the Metacritic scores won't change so most won't notice the change :P

But reviewers yet to review the game won't have that excuse to use.

Look at the latest review added on metacritic.

The patch only just went live; I am sure (or at least I hope) the review wasn't based on less than a day with the game (that review was probably written a couple days ago and then submitted for editing and then published today).  And they are using a review code, not a retail release so not sure how patches work there if at all.  The post-launch reviews will be most effected since they will be intentionally playing what consumers will.  

It affects review codes as well and it's an easy thing to change in a review.



Samus Aran said:
Nuvendil said:
Samus Aran said:
Nuvendil said:
aceburg0413 said:
So, are the reviewers of the game that used that as an excuse to complain going to modify their review?

Most probably won't since the Metacritic scores won't change so most won't notice the change :P

But reviewers yet to review the game won't have that excuse to use.

Look at the latest review added on metacritic.

The patch only just went live; I am sure (or at least I hope) the review wasn't based on less than a day with the game (that review was probably written a couple days ago and then submitted for editing and then published today).  And they are using a review code, not a retail release so not sure how patches work there if at all.  The post-launch reviews will be most effected since they will be intentionally playing what consumers will.  

It affects review codes as well and it's an easy thing to change in a review.

Reviews are based on actual experience and should be.  And the time locking is referenced in passing.  The main concern of the review was the time it would take for players to populate the net with good levels.



Nuvendil said:

Reviews are based on actual experience and should be.  And the time locking is referenced in passing.  The main concern of the review was the time it would take for players to populate the net with good levels.

So his concern is irrelevant and stupid.

And reviews need to reflect the game as it is. That's like complaining in Splatoon that it took to long to find matches because only journalists were playing it...



Around the Network
Samus Aran said:
Nuvendil said:
 

Reviews are based on actual experience and should be.  And the time locking is referenced in passing.  The main concern of the review was the time it would take for players to populate the net with good levels.

So his concern is irrelevant and stupid.

And reviews need to reflect the game as it is. That's like complaining in Splatoon that it took to long to find matches because only journalists were playing it...


Well no in this case it is a more serious concern.  Because the level design quality will be integral to the game quality as far as playing levels is concerned. whereas for Splatoon it's just a minor inconvenience.



Nuvendil said:
 


Well no in this case it is a more serious concern.  Because the level design quality will be integral to the game quality as far as playing levels is concerned. whereas for Splatoon it's just a minor inconvenience.

Millions of people will play this game and it uses a ranking system, so the good levels will always be on top. The concern really makes no sense. Mario isn't a new IP, so the concern is ungrounded.



Pfft, I still had to change my Wii U's clock 8 times yesterday.



Need something off Play-Asia? http://www.play-asia.com/

Nuvendil said:
Samus Aran said:
Nuvendil said:
 

Reviews are based on actual experience and should be.  And the time locking is referenced in passing.  The main concern of the review was the time it would take for players to populate the net with good levels.

So his concern is irrelevant and stupid.

And reviews need to reflect the game as it is. That's like complaining in Splatoon that it took to long to find matches because only journalists were playing it...


Well no in this case it is a more serious concern.  Because the level design quality will be integral to the game quality as far as playing levels is concerned. whereas for Splatoon it's just a minor inconvenience.


It is certainly not a serious concern.



I bet the Wii U would sell more than 15M LTD by the end of 2015. He bet it would sell less. I lost.

Why is people over here so relieved? Weren't you the ones saying that this period was necessary for people to learn the game?

smh...

Its a shame that Nintendo has to learn from their mistakes from reviewers instead of the ''fans''.