or just get rid of the decimal number and give it a 7.
that's what i would do.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Splatoon | Review Thread
- Thread starter James Scott
- Start date
or just get rid of the decimal number and give it a 7.
that's what i would do.
D
Deleted member 1235
Unconfirmed Member
give it a 9 its fucking excellent. also points should be earned for trying their hand at a shooter and making something weird and interesting first go
IAmtheFMan
Member
It's Double Dash all over again.
But in the end it doesn't really matter.
But in the end it doesn't really matter.
Tbh the game is limited on content although we know the game is getting a lot of post launch content, review scores should always be judged on what state the game released in. Having said that he may as well have gave tha game an 8.
I tend to check out the first few 10/10 crazy hyped up reviews. Then the lowest few scores and settle somewhere in between. Watching lots of streams and it looks like a solid 8/10 for me currently. Will probably nab it when I get my new power supply sent from Nintendo. So a week or two no doubt. 
he's probably saying that it was almost an 8 but not quite
not that the score is the important part anyway
This! Yes, that's what I was going for. Glad someone picked up on it.
Yeah, Jose did give Smash for Wii U a high score because of the amount of content, so it's logical that scores are reduced for Splatoon.
Mihael Mello Keehl
Banned
Shoulda gave it a 7.10 then
GustyGardens
Banned
I really respect Jose and his opinion, and if you listen to NVC you can hear that he really loves the game and finds it to be fun as hell, he just thinks it's a bit anemic, and that's fine.
I wonder what the percentage is that's there for Splatoon versus Amiibos.
7.9Pity it wasn't a 7.8, then someone could have made the "too much X" joke.
Just not enough ink.
GoodCoffeeJoey
Banned
Another review from the Financial Post:
http://business.financialpost.com/f...-spraying-shooter-is-refreshing-and-different
http://business.financialpost.com/f...-spraying-shooter-is-refreshing-and-different
plank
Member
They are. But the lower reviews (like IGN's) citing a lack of content wouldn't have given them those scores.
Ranked battles will be out in probably a day or two, and I expect new maps before or during the e3 press conference.
It's an odd strategy, but it's Nintendo, and they are odd. I almost think of it like a BETA that is growing into a fully fleshed out game (for free).
I'd rather have polished gameplay and more content to come later (Splatoon) rather than lot of content with gameplay polish and patches to come later (MCC, AC:Unity).
The gameplay is extremely solid, as reviews will attest, more content is coming later for free. I say screw reviews on this one.
That's a "lets give a game getting high praise an average score so we get press" score.
IGN went to shit a long time ago.
Is this sarcasm, because their score is 0.2 away from the Metacritic average.
But it's not a beta, it's a $60 product, and it is woefully lacking in content. I'm already getting some serious fatigue from playing the same maps over and over. Their weird system of only having two maps in rotation every 4(?) hours isn't helping either, especially when I get the same map for 3+ games in a row or when my play sessions line up in such a way that the same two maps from when I previously played are back in rotation.
I'd rather have a polished game with a respectable amount of content on day one. It happens, it happens a lot. Games aren't always either broken or lacking in content on day one.
orthodoxy1095
Banned
What are you blathering on about? The score is 2% different from the Metacritic average.
I don't sound like an asshole but I think the whole thing happened because Nintendo has reserved ad spots and campaign aimed at May from quite a long ago, so they had to release whatever they got. The thing is it isn't broken game like many other rushed out games.
It's not flat out broken but it's simply missing content and I don't think that's much better. Halo: MCC got ridiculed for a party system that was broken. Splatoon flat out has no party system. Is that any better?
Playing with friends in Splatoon is a nightmare. Join their game, wait the 3 minutes for their game to end so you can join their next lobby, hope enough people leave after every game so you can get the rest of your friends in and do this stupid dance all over again if you disconnect. On top of that the teams are randomized so you might not even get to play with your friends. It's flat out terrible. I'll take a broken party system over this, at least a broken one works some of the time.
WrenchNinja
Member
And they would probably look as silly as the people who mocked the criticism of Omega Ruby and Alpha Sapphire.Pity it wasn't a 7.8, then someone could have made the "too much X" joke.
TheGreatMightyPoo
Banned
I'd give this game a 9.5 but I'm biased because I really like it.
orthodoxy1095
Banned
While I don't approve of their lack of online features, I do think there's a stark difference between not including a feature and including a broken feature. One reeks of regressive, backwards views (Nintendo) and the other reeks of incompetence.
I can only imagine what the reviews and forums would say if this were not a Nintendo game released in this state, but a EA or Activision game.
The uproar would be insane for releasing a fill priced game with so little content.
The game itself is probably excellent, but this is beyond ridiculous. Having a free dlc plan set up is no excuse for releasing a game with so little in it.
The uproar would be insane for releasing a fill priced game with so little content.
The game itself is probably excellent, but this is beyond ridiculous. Having a free dlc plan set up is no excuse for releasing a game with so little in it.
Oh for fuck's sake.
It's not because it's Nintendo.
It's getting shit for having low content.
That's most of what the point deductions are for, with the rest being for online design missteps.
And it's because it's got a free dlc plan that it's getting some leniency, and people aren't going nuts. This is basic shit that's been gone over many times in this thread alone.
Jose is too hard on some games. I'll never forget his review of Skyward Sword.
You were too hard on that masterpiece, buddy.
B+ seems fair.
OrbitalBeard
Member
The reviews reflect the lack of content. This is fairly obvious.
After experiencing around eight hours of Splatoon over the last couple of days, I can assure you that it is one of the best playing games Nintendo has ever made. If the game had more features and content, the scores would have been much higher across the board.
They are releasing a summer-themed game at the start of summer, its not complicated. The roll out plan is a longevity play, the maps to come in the coming weeks are all done (the are already in the single-player mode for the octoling fights). If they wanted to 'meet the checkbox' on map count for reviewer spreadsheets, they could have. They deemed it counter-productive, though, to the product's long-term successes.
The modes, however, are very likely just not done, in fact the whole bulk of the August update seems more like a response to early criticism, which was simply never going to make it to completion in time for retail which was, more than likely, set and planned for, for a long time.
That said, even if we move beyond the spreadsheet checklist for 'content' (and after many hours of gameplay, I now REALLY disagree with the notion but to each their own, though I'd really like to access Splat Zones tomorrow), I don't know how much higher this game could really go. 8s and 9s are fine and that's the majority of its scores anyway. There's plenty of kinks to be worked out from the game and it doesn't really deserve to be earning 10s across the board or anything like that, its average would be a bit higher without the handful of extremely critical scores... which, for all we know, may not have changed for the better.
Just because it has an 81 average on metacritic isn't going to stop this from being one of the most mechanically impressive and deep games released this generation, and one of the better games of the year (mechanically, this is the best game of the year). Just as how having a 70-something score hasn't prevented Destiny from being fun and enjoyable to play.
It really isn't, but that's another discussion entirely. We shouldn't get into it for the sake of the thread.
Jose's Splatoon review just reminded that he is "tough crowd" when it comes to reviewing. He won't let things slide.
The game does feel incomplete, I'm guessing Nintendo figures customers will be playing this game over the summer, and is thinking "let's feed the customer with new things at a rate that makes the game seem fresh".
I feel this is what World of Warcraft did successfully, when most casual fans began to hit everything the game had to offer (Max levels, raids, quests, etc.) you'd hear of a new expansion that would change the game. New max levels, new weapons, new maps, new quests.
Is Nintendo imitating the Blizzard model of giving a vanilla version, that receives expansions to the base game? Something tells me no, but I want to believe.
TDLink
Member
I think some maps are done but not all of them. In the direct they showed 3 while just leaving mystery boxes for the rest. In the story mode there are 2 we don't have yet, Kelp Dome and Bluefin Depot. These are likely going to be among the first we get. They will likely be slightly altered for multiplayer as well (the others that appear in single player are modified). The other map coming relatively soon is probably Camp Triggerfish since that is featured in a bunch of the promotional material. It might even be the first one added. These 3 were also the ones that we actually saw thumbnails of in the direct. Holding them back past release, if they were finished, is kinda disappointing but makes sense if they want "new" content every week or two. The other maps probably aren't going to be done until early July so this way there is no content gap. I completely understand why Nintendo is doing it.
They want this game to be played all summer.
IsntChrisL
Member
I'm enjoying this game so much. There are things they can definitely improve on (like changing weapons/adjusting settings between rounds) but this game is definitely fun and refreshing. It's so different from any multiplayer shooter I've every played. I can't wait for the new maps to start rolling in.
Always-honest
Banned
Niiiiiice. Will buy
As much as some of Kotaku's articles annoy me, I think they have the best system for game reviews.
What they played in the game/what content the review is based on.
Pros and Cons
Should you buy it? Yes/No and why.
Linkstrikesback
Member
As has been said many times already, tiny amount of content and nonexistant online options are why this game isn't reviewing as well as it should do, e.g. if the reviews happened at the end of the year when the game is actually complete.
Nintendo gave reviewers an incomplete game, all they can do is review what they were given.
Splatoons good scores despite that just show how good it is. I got my value for money from the purchase already anyway.
Dr. Black Jack
Member
i c wat u did thar
A new map and weapon are launching today for Splatoon. Ranked Battles also go live at 7pm pacific.
Time to re-review the game folks!
If anyone of those content-based review sites would have followed the Splatoon Direct, they would have known content was coming fast, not just August.
Time to re-review the game folks!
If anyone of those content-based review sites would have followed the Splatoon Direct, they would have known content was coming fast, not just August.