2392

2,388

2, 386

My Little Pony: Equestra Girls - Rainbow Rocks - Welcome to the Show

Michael Salvatori, C Paul Johnson, Martin O Donnell - Destiny OST - End of the Line

Donovan - Catch the Wind

Destiny OST - The Last Array

Michael Salvatori, C Paul Johnson, Martin O Donnell - Destiny OST - Deconstruction

Undertale OST - Hopes and Dreams

Vincent Diamante - Flower OST - Lazy Daydream

♥Starship Amazing Fangirl♥

Miyamoto is too busy making Starfox so he's out of the question, Retro Studios probably in the middle of a Metroid game so they can't help, Zelda team is working on Zelda, Group 4 is working on Mario Maker.

Also lets put it into perspective, You compart Mario kart 8 to Splatoon saying it has more maps, it takes them 6 months to make 8 maps, 4 of which have are old ones with better graphics. So 4 new maps and 4 revamped ones. And that's when they're focusing on 3 characters, 4 cars and maps. Compare that to splatoon which they created an entire game in a year, the amount of maps makes sense, even more in august, and it's cheaper than mario kart by £15.

I was not suggesting Miyamoto or Retro be the ones to help, nor did I say that members from teams already in production of games like the new Zelda or Mario Maker should be taken from their current project and put on board to help with Splatoon. Those are not the only people that Nintendo has employed.

That it may take less time or be less difficult than making maps for a shooter does not excuse them including so little multiplayer content for their multiplayer focused game. You said it yourself, they've only had about a year to develop this, where as other Nintendo IPs get around three to four, if not more. Why is it that they're unwilling to give Splatoon more time? Again, it comes across as laziness, impatience, and/or stubbornness on their part to allow them more time to include more content.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but Mario Kart 8 charged $50 to $60 upon release as well, the same price that Nintendo is charging for Splatoon, so where you see this price difference I'm not sure. Even if Mario Kart 8 were charging more than that, which I would view are wrong as well, it still doesn't make it okay for Nintendo to charge so much for Splatoon, its focus being the MP, and yet giving us so very little MP content for that initial purchase price.

And again, it doesn't matter that they're releasing more later for free. Those aren't what you're getting when you pay for the game, no matter if you buy it now or when those extra maps and modes are out. All that is included in your initial purchase, on the game's discs or bundled in the game's files if bought digitally, are those 5 maps and 2 modes, not the 3, 4, 5, or however many more maps and modes they add later on.

Splatoon with 8 hours, 2 customizable characters, extra gear/equipment to unlock AND it's cheaper! Even more content with amiibo. You also don't unlock costumes in Hyrule warriors, you buy them with real money.

 

 

This is splatoons first game, Mario Kart has had 8 games so they know what they're doing with it, and 16 of those courses are just past courses with extra graphics and tweaks. Splatoon has no past games to copy maps off. Nor did they know how to create splatoon or what to base it off. Giving them even less time for content, which comes out later anyway

This is also Nintendo we're talking about, a company that has been in the video game industry since the 80s, with a lot of people, and a lot of talent, working for them. They absolutely have the ability to give more a helping hand to the group they've put in charge of developing Splatoon. Miyamoto was sent out to help Retro studios when developing the original Metroid Prime on the Gamecube, and look at how it turned out. So it isn't unreasonable to assume they could very well send extra help for Splatoon, especially when it's being developed in house.

They could, again, also delay the game long as necessary in order to get this extra content included in the base game. Neither of these things is unreasonable to ask of them, nor are they something that Nintendo has no experience with doing, or shown unwillingness to try.

I got a solution for Bubble, wait until the free content is released, then purchase the download in eshop. Then you will be getting the "entire" game for the same price.

No, because this free content would still not be a part of the initial purchase, even then. The initial purchase, the content on the disc, or bundled in the game's files if purchased digitally, would still only be those 5 maps and 2 modes, not the extra maps and modes released later. You would still be paying the $50 to $60 for 5 maps and 2 modes.

1. Maybe they're releasing it now because there's no other games coming out for the WIi U now, splatoon can be released now to fill in that gap of no games.

2. In the UK Mario Kart 8 cost £40 at launch, Splatoon costs £25 from certain retailers and £40 for the game, the inkling amiibo and a hat.

1. It still doesn't make it okay to release it with so little content for their main mode, and yet charge the same price as other games that include much more.

2. I'm speaking from the perspective of someone that lives in the USA. Here Mario Kart 8 was $50 to $60, as is Splatoon. I'm going by the price that Nintendo themselves have set, and not any discounted price that a particular retailer is putting it up for.

Well, I'm jumping in to just add ONE thing, because personally This argument seems to be going around in circles/Feedback loops.

 

They had a year to develop it, most likely because(If someone with actual knowledge of the dev cycle can find evidence) This is the EAD Team who usually works on Mario. If I had to venture a guess, Nintendo's looked at sales data and noticed that the 3DS only started selling at a decent pace due to the double bombs of MK7 and SM3DL. Considering NX might be launching 2016, Nintendo's going to want a Mario Game(3D Mario most likely in some form) to come out at/near launch, and they'll be trying to give ample time on it(Anyone remember Kid Icarus: Uprising and how it was going to be a launch title? Yeah, that was a launch title in the same way me traveling back in time to stop the Assassination of JFK and ending up a year late is stopping it). I could see Iwata/the higher ups going "We want a 3D Mario Game for NX's launch", EAD realizing that they can make an NX 3D Mario in about a year and half(Assuming testing/localization/everything of 3-6 months, they've been on that pace since Galaxy 2 roughly without the HD..issues[Galaxy 2 May 2010, SM3DL November 2011, SM3DW November 2013, Splatoon May 2015]) so they time to fill.

 

It's likely that the plan is once Splatoon finishes development(Which it has because Global testing) about 75% of the team will go to work on Super Mario NeXt while the 25% left will be making/finishing the maps/patches and the like.

 

TL;DR-Iwata has visions of the Future, but thanks to the EADNoda he can help make sure everything goes optimally.

Even then, I still don't believe it right to price the game as they have done. As others have pointed out, yes, it's releasing free content later, but I don't feel that, nor what you've mentioned (if it is indeed the case) still makes it alright to charge such a large price for what little it provides in regards to its main mode. If they were advertising the game's single player and multiplayer in equal measure, and had been from Day 1, and were charging $30 to $40 at most, then I don't believe I'd have quite as much an issue.

For such a steep asking price I expect much more than a 6 to 8 hour campaign, 5 multiplayer maps, and 2 multiplayer modes, especially when your game's main selling point is the multiplayer itself.

They are not part of the purchase because they are not on the disc or in the bundled files if you buy it digitally. It's that simple.

These new maps and modes aren't coming on launch day. They're coming some time afterwards. Even if they were, and you had to download an update in order to play online, and this update included those, they are still not on the disc, and not bundled in the digital release, therefore they are not part of what you purchased.

I didn't say the single player didn't matter. What I said was that the multiplayer is the main focus, and it is. That some people are buying it for the single player does not change that fact. From its original announcement to now the multiplayer has been what they've advertised it on more than anything. It's what the initial gameplay has been about. As it is the main focus, there should be plenty of content for it, but there is not. There are only 5 maps and 2 game modes, one of which is locked until enough people reach level 10.
 

Halo in particular is not advertised and sold most on its multiplayer. They focus on the single player and multiplayer in equal measure, and cover both of them extensively. Whether or not other games focus more on single player or multiplayer does not matter. Call of Duty certainly includes many more maps and game modes than Splatoon does on launch, and its focus, like Splatoon's, is its multiplayer.

Throughout the entire discussion I have remained civil and not once resorted to name calling or otherwise insulting anyone. I would appreciate it if you did the same.

So with Minecraft, if you buy it now you're buying past versions and the current one.

So... If you buy the digital verson of splatoon in August? What are you paying for? The splatoon with the current version. It's simple, just buy the digital version in August.

I've explained this multiple times now.
 

"In August, if you purchase Splatoon via disc, you are buying the version that is on that disc. If you buy it digitally, and the digital version has been pre-updated to the current version with new maps and modes, then that is what you are buying. If you have to update the game after purchasing it in order to get those new maps and modes, then no, those maps and modes are not part of the game you are buying. The same applies to a new version of the game."

Even then, I still don't find it okay for Nintendo to charge $50 to $60 for the current version of the game and the amount of content it includes.

Actually, i know quite a few people who wouldn't be picking this game up if it didn't have SP.  If you don't like the price for what you get, that is on you and i would recommend contacting Nintendo or hitting up MiiVerse. Other than that, there is not really much else to be said.

Again, this is not the point. The point is that their multiplayer focused game offers very, very little for said multiplayer. The mode they have been advertising the game, the game's main selling point, has always been its multiplayer. So it makes no sense at all to charge so much when you're offering so little for the main focus of your game. I don't find it to be acceptable, especially with games both in the past and present offering more, and I even find it to be disrespectful towards the consumer, especially with them asking you to pre-purchase the game all over the demo.

I would have used the argument that having a small development time is also a reason of the lack of maps, but we already discussed that before and her counter argument was to just delay the game, so 1 thing I don't understand is, how does delaying the game by 2 months suddenly make splatoon worth the money, even though it'll have the exact same things in 2 months if it was released now?

It makes it more worth the money because those free maps and modes would be included in the initial purchase. That is what would make it more worth the money than the skeletal 5 maps and 2 modes we're being charged $50 to $60 USD for now.

I've already said that, while it is good they're releasing these for free, it doesn't change the fact that these aren't what you're paying for. What you are paying for is what is on the game disc, or in the bundled files if purchased digitally, and those new maps and modes are not a part of either. That means that you are not buying or getting those when you buy the game. Those come later, as additional content.

So it wouldn't just have the exact same things. It would include the maps and modes we're getting for free later. That means that you are getting more content for the steep price they're asking for.

If EA or Activision tried to do this, and it's arguable that EA kind of did with Titanfall, then more people would be calling them out on it. It really does seem to me that the reason more people aren't doing so now is because it's Nintendo, and because they like both Nintendo and are excited for Splatoon.

When a company releases a MP focused game, then there needs to be a lot of content there if they're going to charge a full $50 to $60. Were Splatoon focused more on the single player, and its price only around $30 or so, then I would be much more understanding. That isn't the case here, though. While yes, it does have a single player, the focus from the beginning has been the MP. To charge so much for so little content in the mode you've been selling your game on is not okay in my eyes.

Hmm I see, I have to agree with bubblegum. I hate the idea of content being released that isn't apart of the initial game. But everyone is doing it so.

It's not even necessarily that "They're not including [CONTENT X] with the full game!" but more "They're charging $50 to $60 for a MP focused game, with only 5 maps and 2 modes!". Can you name any recent title that did this?

An example I've already provided is Halo: Combat Evolved for the original Xbox. That game was focused on, advertised on, the single player. It had an 8 to 10 hour single player campaign, but it also had multilplayer. This multiplayer was a last minute addition I believe, and yet the game shipped with 13 maps and 5 modes. That was in 2001. Why is it that, in 2015, for a MP focused game, we are settling on less than we got from a single player focused game? We shouldn't be.

Cute. Your introduction certainly made me giggle.

1. Trust me, Nintendo Haters would be all over this if that were the case, yet the only thing I see them talking about is the lack of voice chat, everything else seems to be ignored.

2. Also you're degrading the single player, a lot of reviewers have loved the single player from what they've played with. It also takes 8+ hours to complete. That's longer than a ton of single player only games that's out there which cost more money. Yet they don't get any hate. You're making it out like the single player is just an added bonus, but it's a huge thing on it's own. Nintendo's just advertising the multiplayer more.

1. My point is that if EA or Activision were releasing a MP focused game with only 5 maps and 2 modes, people would be all over them. People aren't for Nintendo in regards to Splatoon, for whatever reason, and I can only see this as due to people liking Nintendo and Splatoon more, possibly thinking that it's okay for Nintendo to do it because they don't believe Nintendo is as bad as those other companies. While they may or may not be, no company should be allowed a free pass for this sort of thing. Not a one.

2. I'm not degrading the single player. Splatoon is a MP focused game. That is what they have been advertising the game on. That has, from day 1, been their main focus. There is a SP yes, and it is the usual 6 to 8 hours, but it isn't the focus of the game. The focus is the MP, and so it only makes sense to feature a plethora of content for the main focus of your game. To release it for such a steep price, yet including so little, is the problem here.

Mario Kart 8 is focused on the MP, and it includes 32 tracks and 3 to 4 modes right out of the box. Whether or not it takes more effort to design a map for a shooter than a race track doesn't matter. This is Nintendo we're talking about. They're more than capable of taking on the task and getting more people to assist in production if necessary. You should not be settling for so much less content for the same asking price not only in comparison to other titles they have released, but also similar games that other developers have been putting out for years.

Well they're free aren't they. You might as well complain about hyrule warriors content.

The fact that they're free is irrelevant. That isn't what you're paying $50 to $60 for. You're paying $50 to $60 for a MP focused game with only 5 MP maps and 2 MP modes. That is an abysmal amount of content for the mode they're selling the game on, that they have been focusing on and advertising the game on since day 1. This free content is not part of the game you're buying. The only MP content that is part of the game you're buying are those initial 5 maps and 2 modes. Anything else is entirely separate. Not part of that initial $50 to $60 entry fee.

Hyrule Warriors charges like 20 dollars for dlc content that has even more content within the initial game lol.

The $20 is when you buy all of the DLC in one bundle. Were you to buy everything separately it would be around $27 dollars, so you're at least saving $7.00 then. I'm not sure just how many characters and skins, as well as levels, the base game shipped with. If someone could please let me know, I would greatly appreciate that. It's also important to know the average length of the game as well, and any additional content, as to my knowledge Hyrule Warriors is a singleplayer focused game.

Again, you can't compare Zelda to Splatoon, all Splatoon lacks is maps which can be added any time after it's release, Since they can easily just keep playing the maps they have now. Zelda has a progressive story which CANNOT be paused because the dungeon hasn't been made yet. It completly haults the players experiance and stops them from doing anything else in the game, they will literally not be able to do anything until an update appears, compare that to splatoon where they have an entire single player to go through (again, 8 hours of content right there, a lot more hours if you count amiibo's), aswell as the multiplayer which you can already play without any bugs or glitches or anything broken, just less maps, Which again will get a ton more when time passes, There's no need to not allow players to not play the game because that 6th/7th/8th map isn't complete. Just play it now, give them it later. Heck it even gives them a reason to play splatoon again if they get bored after the first month.

It lacks maps and game modes. That they can be added later is not the point. It does not matter that they can add maps and modes later. What matters is that they're selling a MP focused game with an astonishingly bare bones amount of content to that main mode.

I'm not defending any mistakes Hyrule Warriors has made, so please don't take what I've said in such a way.