• 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

W

Wowfunhappy

Member
Ansatz said:
People and reviewers don't seem to understand the concept behind arcade games. It's all about the number of maps, having endless weapon/character customization options, plenty of xp bars to fill and online modes to choose from. This all results in low quality and inbalance of the gameplay, it's the shitty bigger is better mentality all over again.

It's like you want games to be like WoW where the small ammount of substance the game actually has is bloated to last infinitely longer than it should. The replay value should be judged based on how much fun the core gameplay is, not how much (pointless) stuff there is to do. Just think about any competitive game out there, like how Counter Strike is based on the same mode and 5 core maps you play over and over since 15 years back.

Honestly Splatoon didn't catch on with these reviewers because there are no skinner box elements to it which means the game has no addictive quality. Mario Kart 8 also had this very same issue, they complained about how little stuff there is to unlock and how it needed more content for them to jump back into it.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately (in my opinion), Splatoon does have a "skinner box" element: an XP system. XP systems in multiplayer games essentially handicap the people who need it least—the newest players. Not only are newer players less skilled at the game physically—they also have worse stats and weapons. How is this a good gameplay element?

I generally agree with you, though. We need to get away from talking about how many weapons/maps/modes a game has, and start talking instead about how fun those modes are.
 
R

RagnarokX

Member
Wowfunhappy said:
Unfortunately (in my opinion), Splatoon does have a "skinner box" element: an XP system. XP systems in multiplayer games essentially handicap the people who need it least—the newest players. Not only are newer players less skilled at the game physically—they also have worse stats and weapons. How is this a good gameplay element?

I generally agree with you, though. We need to get away from talking about how many weapons/maps/modes a game has, and start talking instead about how fun those modes are.
Click to expand...

The XP system exists as a gate to prevent unskilled players from jumping into ranked battles. The starting weapons are extremely balanced and I don't think the higher weapons give you that much of an advantage; especially not in turf wars, which is the only mode you can play until you reach level 10 anyway.
 
Laughing Banana

Laughing Banana

Weeping Pickle
Not that it does discredit the criticism about its light content, but I am surprised (well... not really) that many would think that Nintendo's decision to release content on periodic updates as..., how should I call it..., deliberate move as a part of this "releasing an incomplete game masterplan"?

For me it's quite obvious that the intent is to make sure that people would coming back for more and more to check out the new updates, prolonging the longevity of the game. Doubly so since this is an online-focused game in the Wii-U... which is to be fair can be a quite worrying thing if you are looking for a game with consistent, robust community.
 
W

Wowfunhappy

Member
RagnarokX said:
The starting weapons are extremely balanced and I don't think the higher weapons give you that much of an advantage; especially not in turf wars, which is the only mode you can play until you reach level 10 anyway.
Click to expand...

They give you literal stat increases though... you can hold more paint etc. If there's not much of an advantage why do they have them?
 
R

RagnarokX

Member
Wowfunhappy said:
They give you literal stat increases though... you can hold more paint etc. If there's not much of an advantage why do they have them?
Click to expand...

Paint? There's no paint in this game. :p

The gear gives you perks, but it's not as big a deal in turf wars because the objective is to lay the most ink on whole map in 3 minutes and taking time to refill your tank isn't really a problem. The perks matter more in ranked matches where you're forced to engage the enemy and there's more pressure.
 
E

EndlessSky

Member
Wowfunhappy said:
They give you literal stat increases though... you can hold more paint etc. If there's not much of an advantage why do they have them?
Click to expand...

I was under the impression that the higher level weapon sets are just for variety. Like the stat distributions are different, but the beginning weapons would be just as viable in ranked battles as they are to a level 1. The other sets just give you different ways to play, that are perhaps better suited for a certain purpose, but the basic sets are good for a basic purpose and can still serve the team well.

I may be wrong though, just the impression I got from skimming the spoiler thread.
 
R

Rezbit

Member
I already made up my mind to buy this after playing the testfire, but it's good to see an unproven new IP getting positive reviews. Hopefully that translates to a decent player base with some longevity.
 
P

Poimandres

Member
Dr. Black Jack said:
No, it's that the sites that docked points because the game didn't have one of their magical TPS bullet point features are weighted more heavily into that average.
Click to expand...

The last TPS I truly loved was Lost Planet 2. That game got torn apart by a lot of reviewers, but they had their reasons. If a lack of voice chat or something is a huge deal for a reviewer it doesn't really invalidate their opinion if you feel differently. I don't really like dismissing reviews unless they are straight up factually inaccurate.
 
O

orthodoxy1095

Banned
Dr. Black Jack said:
so why not just score it a 9
Click to expand...
Because you score a game on what it is, not on what it will or might be.
Illucio said:
When reading the lower score reviews are rather... Sad.

When you read the top scores you can see that the people actually took the time playing it and was able to express the game's entirety, when the lower scores sounds like they didn't dive into the game too much and they were complaining about things that were either their error and or things that are easily solved if they actually went out for a solution.
Click to expand...
This is such a ridiculous post. "The people that don't like the game just didn't understand it and who cares about their opinion because they didn't play it the right way."
 
S

superbank

The definition of front-butt.
Ansatz said:
People and reviewers don't seem to understand the concept behind arcade games. It's all about the number of maps, having endless weapon/character customization options, plenty of xp bars to fill and online modes to choose from. This all results in low quality and inbalance of the gameplay, it's the shitty bigger is better mentality all over again.

It's like you want games to be like WoW where the small ammount of substance the game actually has is bloated to last infinitely longer than it should. The replay value should be judged based on how much fun the core gameplay is, not how much (pointless) stuff there is to do. Just think about any competitive game out there, like how Counter Strike is based on the same mode and 5 core maps you play over and over since 15 years back.

Honestly Splatoon didn't catch on with these reviewers because there are no skinner box elements to it which means the game has no addictive quality. Mario Kart 8 also had this very same issue, they complained about how little stuff there is to unlock and how it needed more content for them to jump back into it.
Click to expand...

KooopaKid said:
The addictive quality are the core mechanics, the controls and the visual/aural feedback.
It's the perfect one-more-go game. Not for getting new gears, not for filling a bar, just for the fun of the battles.
Click to expand...

Whoa whoa whoa, hold up. Unfortunately, there are "skinner box" elements in Splatoon. You have to check the stores every day for a chance at buying new gear which have perks. You can equip 3 pieces of gear. Gear has one main perk and can have up to 3 sub-perks which are randomized. If you don't get the perks you want you have to use a sea snail to re-roll and not get the perks you want again. Sea Snails are hard to acquire, but you can also use 30,000 points to re-roll too.

Yeah, it's some sad shit. Since I don't have the game I don't know how bad it really is... but it sounds terrible.
 
D

Deleted member 17706

Unconfirmed Member
Welp, the positive impressions got to me and I just bought this on the eShop (Japanese Wii U). Very small download size (1750 MB or so), so it should be ready to go soon.

Gotta eat dinner and play some Witcher 3 first, but I'm excited.
 
Aceofspades

Aceofspades

Banned
Decent scores, not all games have to be 90+ meta to be good.

I have enjoyed Driveclub and The Order 1886 immensely and I'm 100% sure I will enjoy Ryse knowing my taste...those games got criticized for things they didn't try to achieve.


So, always follow your own taste, apply your own metrics and see if the game follows it then you can decide.
 
V

Vena

Member
SgtCobra said:
Metacritic says 81, am I missing something?
Click to expand...

He's (and many others in here) talking about the average you get from the OP, which contains ALL of the reviews and not just the ones Metacritic counts or has, at current, updated.

Its like the Metacritic vs. Rotten for movies... or Mad Max which varies between the two from 89% to 98%, respectively.
 
G

GoonerTRON

Banned
Vena said:
He's (and many others in here) talking about the average you get from the OP, which contains ALL of the reviews and not just the ones Metacritic counts or has, at current, updated.

Its like the Metacritic vs. Rotten for movies... or Mad Max which varies between the two from 89% to 98%, respectively.
Click to expand...
Metacritc is a average.

RT is more like if its over 5 its fresh if its under 5 its rotten.
 
Sojiro

Sojiro

Member
Looking really good review wise. Doesn't even matter what the reviews looked like for me though, I was sold on this game before the global test fires, and after i'm just frothing to play it.
 
A

Alrus

Member
Poimandres said:
So the meta critic is at 81 at the moment. Are there a bunch of scores missing? That's solid but some people in here are celebrating like it's a 9+ average. Not that scores matter much, but I'm just saying!
Click to expand...

I think some people expected it to get trashed by review for being released in an incomplete state (imo that would have been sorta justified) with archaic online features. Since it's got fairly decent scores, people are happy.
 
P

PreyingShark

Member
Alrus said:
I think some people expected it to get trashed by review for being released in an incomplete state (imo that would have been sorta justified) with archaic online features. Since it's got fairly decent scores, people are happy.
Click to expand...
It's simpler than that.

If you compare the OP and Metacritic you'll see that a lot of 9+ scores, including all four perfect scores, are not on Metacritic. And a lot of us are looking at the OP, not Metacritic.
 
R

Recall

Member
PreyingShark said:
It's simpler than that.

If you compare the OP and Metacritic you'll see that a lot of 9+ scores, including all four perfect scores, are not on Metacritic. And a lot of us are looking at the OP, not Metacritic.
Click to expand...

And the OP is where should look. Metacritic isn't the whole spread of the reviews, it's basically just a sample and that isn't fair and doesn't give the whole picture.
 
P

Poimandres

Member
Recall said:
And the OP is where should look. Metacritic isn't the whole spread of the reviews, it's basically just a sample and that isn't fair and doesn't give the whole picture.
Click to expand...

Aren't there MORE scores being counted on meta critic than the OP at the moment? Meta should be updated with the missing scores... And so should the OP
 
M

Mdk7

Member
Wreck-It Ralph said:
Why are there 23 9+ reviews in the OP but only 8 9+ reviews on Metacritic? Does Metacritic always only include select reviews?
Click to expand...

Some of them - like mine - might not be there yet, as we plan to update the score later on ( with the release of future updates) and i think their policy is to wait until you give them one "final" verdict that doesn't change.
 
K

KooopaKid

Banned
superbank said:
Whoa whoa whoa, hold up. Unfortunately, there are "skinner box" elements in Splatoon. You have to check the stores every day for a chance at buying new gear which have perks. You can equip 3 pieces of gear. Gear has one main perk and can have up to 3 sub-perks which are randomized. If you don't get the perks you want you have to use a sea snail to re-roll and not get the perks you want again. Sea Snails are hard to acquire, but you can also use 30,000 points to re-roll too.

Yeah, it's some sad shit. Since I don't have the game I don't know how bad it really is... but it sounds terrible.
Click to expand...

And none of them really matters in my experience. A level 1 in Splatoon can compete against higher levels. You just have to play matches to unlock the new weapons.
 
N

NotLiquid

Member
Wreck-It Ralph said:
That's bizarre. How can you call yourself a review aggregator when you're not aggregating all of the reviews?

Who decides which review sources are worthy and which aren't?
Click to expand...

For the most of the part, a lot of publications have to go through a certain process to become a verified critic on Metacritic. A few of the publications listed are already a part of MC, but only under other categories like Music and Movies, so certain reviews like Time's review won't be added.
 
S

spekkeh

Banned
Wreck-It Ralph said:
That's bizarre. How can you call yourself a review aggregator when you're not aggregating all of the reviews?

Who decides which review sources are worthy and which aren't?
Click to expand...

That's not so bizarre, there are a tonne of small games websites, most of them run by amateurs, whose opinion might not be very informed or expertlike and that would likely troll for clicks once they do get on the list. There's some kind of selection/vetting process, but I think metacritic keeps it under wraps why some do get chosen.
 
O

orthodoxy1095

Banned
StayDead said:
Wow, I didn't know that. Considering how much importance people seem to give metacritic that's pretty damned shady imo. It's like censoring opinions of people they don't deem "worthy" enough.
Click to expand...
I don't see what's "shady" about it or how it's "censoring" anything. There does have to be some valuation of "worth" going on. The problem as a review aggregator is how to determine which sites are worth factoring into the average. They can't just let any Joe Schmoe make it into the aggregator. What would be the value in that? Do you really just want an unvetted process?
 
W

Wagram

Member
StayDead said:
Wow, I didn't know that. Considering how much importance people seem to give metacritic that's pretty damned shady imo. It's like censoring opinions of people they don't deem "worthy" enough.
Click to expand...

It's easy to buy opinions. You don't want a completely open metacritic.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Nintendo 3DS And Wii U Online Servers Are Taken Down For Good
Hardware Platform
7
1K
RagnarokIV replied
Splatoon 3 | New DLC and Season Trailer Released
Trailer
16
1K
Sojiro replied
Splatoon 3 | Review Thread
Analysis Hype Platform 2 3 4 5
230
16K
RaptorGTA replied
Foamstars | Review Thread
44
3K
havoc00 replied
Famitsu Sales: week 8, 2024 (Feb 19 - Feb 25)
Sales-Age
11
1K
Woopah replied
Top Bottom