Splatoon Hype Thread. Hype = 7 GS: 8/10 HYPE EXCEEDED

The brevity of a game can absolutely be an issue. If Virtua Fighter only had 6 fighters and a handful of stages with very little in the way of online features, it does stack up poorly against some of its competition. Because fighting engine wise Street Fighter isn't taking a back seat to many games, it's plenty legit in that department. The more fighters adds up in a lot of ways. For starters it offers the player a variety of character types to learn, a variety of oppnents, and thus a deeper metagame because of all the match ups you have to account for.

Obviously there is a sweet spot, because you can simply have too many characters for it to actually be balanced. But it matters.

The quality of Splatoon is not in question, but it is foolish to pretend Nintendo is some hack developer without the resources to do all of the above
-Have voice chat a convenience feature that is a standard
-Have the ability to squad up with friends
-Have the ability to have private lobbies, custom games are among the many reasons Halo's multiplayer got big in the first place
-The ability to actually pick the maps
-It should have launched with all the maps or realistically been released in August when said maps, modes, and features were going to be ready.

Nintendo isn't some indie dev who can only do A or B, they have enough resources and talent that they should and could have done it all. Besides your point clearly had weight, the game scored favorably, FF's point is the only thing putting it in the low 80s on MC, and not the high 80s/low 90s on MC is the lack of content and standard features missing. Because they do have an impact on your play time.

lol those poor fools are going to get destroyed when they join. Ranked matches are already intense as hell. When others join months later it won't be pretty for them. I was messing around in turf wars and ended up with 1675. It will only get worse the longer you wait.

@bunchanumbers: Exactly! Splatoon takes more skill than most if not all other shooters imo. There are so many strategies and techniques that can be used to win matches. It's quite refreshing. (And I play BF,COD, Titanfall, Destiny etc)

@jg4xchamp: I'm sure they didn't release all the maps ect. just to prolong the online community. If they released everything out the gate, its more likely for online to burn out quicker.

If that's their reasoning, it's shit reasoning.

Plenty of multiplayer games that had staying power didn't burn out quickly because they had a lot of content there early. It has more to do with either the content not being good enough or there not being enough content in terms of maps and modes.

Three of those you just listed have a pretty short skill ceiling (in destiny's case no skill what so ever). And getting rekt early isn't the issue, it's a matter of will you actually put in the effort to get good at the game. Which in mp you can, because guess what plenty of people get their ass kicked when they try to get on Counterstrike now. That people that stick with it, get better, and actually learn to play the game at a competent level.

There is a difference between counterstrike and Splatoon though. The game was meant for different groups. If you're a fairly casual player and you get destroyed in splatoon, most likely you'll give up. This could be a future problem.

That's any online game ever, and that's casuals in general. Kids in general for that matter, I don't know if you remember what you were like when you were a kid, but I definitely remember me being a sore loser. My nephew's a sore loser, won't bump smash bros ai past level 3. It is what it is, if they get rekt, they get rekt who cares. If they didn't want to get better that's on them, no?

not really. Everyone goes in games as new players and you learn. To say oh you join to late so you will never get good makes no sense. Also are any of the updates going to be being able to play with your friends and make parties? If it is maybe they are also waiting to be able to have people they know.

It arrives today at 7pm PT.

http://www.nintendolife.com/news/2015/06/get_messy_in_splatoons_latest_free_stage_kelp_dome

@GameboyTroy: Woot can't wait to play it!

I stopped playing MP for four days, been collecting everything SP had to offer. I'm already getting destroyed. I went from 11-2s to 4-13s. My 8 year old totally shits on me though, she's getting 14 kills a match. I honestly feel depressed about it... It kind of hurts my pride, lol.

lol its only natural. She wasn't raised on dual analogs and the aiming of the gamepad will feel natural to her. I wouldn't be shocked if she becomes a destroyer in Splatoon.

i just played the new map kelp dome.

i really feel this map is less reliant on kills and much more concentrated on painting. since the map is so big even if you get killed you respawn in good position.

Holy shit, a second new map already? I thought they were gonna take their time with adding new stuff, but Nintendo is adding maps really quickly, and nicely. I hope we can see what Rainmaker is soon, the name sounds so cool. I wish they announce when all of this shit is coming, or a schedule so we can get properly hyped about these updates.

id rather have a new game mode than another map next.

@KBFloYd: I do too. But these maps, all of them are quality. :P

it means i have to learn a new map is a lot of work

@finalfantasy94 I mean if VF only had like 4 fighters it would get negative impressions for it since its not much to mess with.Also if VF lacked the option to make a room or invite friends to a fight or any other common online option for fighters it would get slack for it as well since those features are kinda important. Game could be fun,but you cant simply ignore and cover up what it clearly lacks out the door.

Yes, if it had only 4 fighters one would compare it with other fighter games with similar complexity/mechanics and see that 4 fighters is much less thant what those other games are offering.

If you want to make an honest comparison, let's say VF launched with 10 fighters instead of the 20 you usually find in a game like that but it has a gameplay so innovative that it redefines de genre completely, and as solid as the one in Splatoon. Is it so hard to imagine this game ranking much higher than the one with 20 fighters when it does so much more in more crucial aspects of the game? Maybe a fighter is not a good example because the playability is directly tied to the different fighters, let's put a Gran Turismo that instead of having 1000 cars has let's say 100 cars but an incredible new driving mechanic that evolves it to levels no one could imagine before the game was released.

What I'm saying, and I think it's fairly obvious, is that if the game evolves the gameplay mechanics of a certain genre to the point Splatoon does you can't simply rate the game in the same 1-10 scale you normally do, because that 1-10 scale wasn't contemplating something like that until now. This is absolutely unfair because those games released until now could get a 10 in gameplay even when if put side to side against Splatoon they were much more limited offers or did nothing new, but Splatoon can't get "more than a 10" because "10 is the maximum" despite doing much more in those areas than those games that also got a 10 did.

And then you obviously "have to subtract points because 5 scenarios is not a lot in comparison to the 10 scenarios you usually get" or because "you don't have other options available in other games".

So all in all you end with much worse games (The Last of Us) getting much higher scores only because they had what the reviewed expected them to have.

@jg4xchamp The brevity of a game can absolutely be an issue. If Virtua Fighter only had 6 fighters and a handful of stages with very little in the way of online features, it does stack up poorly against some of its competition. Because fighting engine wise Street Fighter isn't taking a back seat to many games, it's plenty legit in that department. The more fighters adds up in a lot of ways. For starters it offers the player a variety of character types to learn, a variety of oppnents, and thus a deeper metagame because of all the match ups you have to account for.

Yes, but now let's imagine that every single fighting game released was like Dragon Ball Tenkaichi. Tons of characters but with the exact same animations to hit and then different "special attacks" to introduce some variety to the 100 clones the roster has.

And suddenly, VF is released with 10 fighters. Yes, it's 10 vs 100, but to make a VF in that context has much, much, much more merit and evolves the genre much further than a DBTenkaichi clone with let's say 120 clones in the roster.

In the case of Splatoon, besides reinventing the 3rd person shooting genre you have the deepest shooter mechanics I've ever seen, something unparalleled in the genre in those terms. So, if games that are clearly more limited in that aspect got a pass when they were released because back then it wasn't possible to imagine something like Splatoon could be made, then I think it's fair to put in perspective this lack of features in Splatoon.

Do you want to express it in numbers? Fine, but let's be coherent. 10 can't mean perfection because no one knows what "perfection" is, and as video-games evolve the concept of "perfection" changes as well. So if we take a 10 as "what has been done until now but at the highest level", when we are in front of something that goes beyond that and does "much more than what has been done until now" then it's only fair to rate it with a 12, or with a 15 in that certain aspect. Of course 15/10 may sound stupid, but that's what it is.

Splatoon lowers the entry bar (shoot everywhere you want that it still counts) while deepening the gameplay (the amount of strategies you can come up thanks to the ink system is incredible, it never ceases to amaze me) at the same time, and it manages to do so while adding a spin to the genre (paint instead of kill).

Do you want to put a number to that? Fine, but you have to be coherent, because a game released yesterday that didn't do that much in terms of gameplay could very well have a 10, and it's obvious that this 10 is worse than a 10 given to Splatoon in the same aspect, but a 10 is a 10 and the idea that someone that sees the number and hasn't played any of the games will be that "both are equally good in that aspect".

That's besides the fact that gameplay > content, of course a game has to be released with a minimum of content, but you can have an incredible game with an incredible gameplay and not so much content while you'll never have a good game if the gameplay is shitty no matter how much content you add to it.

If Splatoon is a 5/10 in terms of content, it's also a 15/10 in terms of gameplay. In the end, it would be better to have a review that instead of a number had a remark like "Splatoon is an incredibly innovative game with what may be the best gameplay ever seen in the TPS genre, but for the moment it still lacks some options and content". People then would decide by themselves if that missing content is compensated by the incredible gameplay, but if you put an 8 to it, then you're telling the people "hey, this game is worse than those other games we reviewed with a 9 or 10".

I finally got my turf wars setup complete. Now I just need to finish my gear for ranked matches and then I'm all set for both. Too many combinations and rerolling is unreliable. Either way since hitting 20, spike has been my new best fish buddy.

I'm at level 9, also I tried out the local multiplayer and sadly it's pretty boring.

Here's the Power Armour

http://gonintendo.com/stories/235605-splatoon-using-the-super-sea-snails

yea...

game isnt for everyone....however it being a new nintendo IP...its making a name for itself....like pikmin did in the gamecube era.

i like splatoon a lot more than pikmin because of online.

Why are you trying to make these 1:1 comparisons based on hypotheticals, when we have actual factual examples we can work with.

I'm not going to argue some nonsense over the validity of breaking down the many variables of a video game and judging it in the form of a number that really only fits one persons opinion. And I can't speak to Splatoon's shooting mecahnics or its depth, but Unreal wasn't lacking in depth, neither is Counterstrike, neither is Battlefield for that matter as a shooter, neither was Tribes Ascend a few years ago, neither was Planetside 2, neither was Team Fortress 2, and frankly The Last of Us has its own variables to go with as well.

You can be a deeper game and have an underwhelming product at the same time. Splatoon's gameplay can be fantastic, and it can also be missing quality of life features it should have, it can be an underdeveloped multiplayer that is either

A: released before it is finished, because magically those things will be their in august

or

B: nintendo is holding back content for an arbitrary reason that does more harm than good.

Nintendo is not some buschleague developer, they are usually described as one of the best, if not the best developer out there right?

And you would argue the gameplay is fantastic right?

Then likewise the game has no excuse for why it doesn't have voice chat when voice chat should be there, it has no excuse for why it launched with less maps than the average shooter, much less the best ones, it launched with less modes, it launched without the ability to have private lobbies, it launched without the ability to squad up with your friends in a type of game where you would want to play with your friends. Those are short comings it should not have, and at 60 bucks plenty of people can argue it being a pretty lousy. I dig Vanquish way the **** more than I ever will a Gears of War, but I'm not going to lie and say you don't get more for your money out of Gears of War, that much has to be an accepted fact, unless one of its things were straight broken. I'll argue Vanquish is the better game, and if you want to argue Splatoon is a better game than Battlefield or Gears of War or whatever, be my guest. I wasn't having that debate.

I'm not debating with opinion, not debating with emotion, certainly not debating with hyperbole, merely stated some fact that any rational human being should be able to accept. Splatoon can be multiple things. It can be a good game (great game in your case) while being underdeveloped. Because we have more than enough examples of how Nintendo did less than the bare minimum when it came to offering a robust online experience when said game launched or even today on June 11, 2015. In August, that argument comes back down to it just doesn't have voice chat. Which is still shit, but in my case I can deal with it for a good game since the cats I'll play this game with will skype with me anyway.

Bonus point: 10 doesn't mean perfect, max score doesn't mean perfect, it's a grading scale for a piece of entertainment/art that is inherently subjective. The score is just whatever the **** adjective you really want that 10 to be: essential, prime, funderful, whatever, it's the highest honor you're willing to grade a game. And I don't actually have a problem with said number being used, because scales that don't use their max scores arbitrarily put too much weight on the high end. Likewise for an overall score no I wouldn't break it down into increments, although in my personal I do judge a game primarily around its gameplay more than anything else.

@GameboyTroy: super sea snails are awesome. Means that any piece of gear can end up being a end game item. I'm using 1 and 2 star items for my final turf wars setup.

I know I've been bitching how this game lacks content. But god dammit Nintendo, you're adding content way too fast. I want time to take in the new map, but now they're adding a new weapon as well...

lol! we're never satisfied! Love the new map though. I take a dynamo roller to it. The golden one.

Will play in 20 minutes.

Splash-o-matic DLC is here at 7pm PT.

http://gonintendo.com/stories/235655-splatoon-splash-o-matic-weapon-dlc-coming-tonight

Yep. I'm kind of starting to dig this thing, release a few things one by one so we get to know them. In all of the other FPS games and competitive games, I only remember 1-2 maps out of the 15+ selections. But god, I know all of the maps in here, and I like them. I didn't think this would end up to be a good thing, we all saw how other developers do it, and it sucks there. The period between each DLC is huge, and the DLC itself sucks! Look at Witcher 3's meaningless "free" DLC. Who cares about chest hair DLC or Horse armor? Or Dying Light not releasing Hard Mode until everyone got tired of the game.

Also, the Japanese are going to war to see which food is the best. This truck is getting Inkopolis its makeover for their Splatfest! Damn shame ours is 10 days away. How long does a Splatfest last though?

@ultimateimp: oh so that is where those splat fest t shirts came from! I was wondering why I couldn't get spike to steal me one. I had no idea they were special event gear. Awesome! Nintendo listened to me. I was hoping they would do something like a dog or cat mask though. That would be balls.

Current set up

.52 gal deco

Head : Tenacity, special charge up, ink saver main, special saver

clothes : Ninja Squid, Damage up, Swim Speed up, Locked

Feet : Stealth Swim, Defence Up, Damage Up, Quick Respawn.

i went back to the regular 52gal.....i decided on killer wail instead of inkstrike.

The dome level is huge. It's like the skate park on steroids.

I like how all maps are totally unique. They really planned them out a lot.

So far I'd say the mall is my favourite and the rig is my least favourite.

Also different weapons work better or not at all on certain maps. This game is so addictive that TW3 is left catching dust.

@wiiboxstation: I honestly can't pick up Witcher 3 after this game launched. I've tried to play Witcher 3 for more than half an hour, but I get tired of it really quickly and go back to Splatoon, lol.

Yeah I'm having the same problem. I should be playing TW3 or ESO but I can't stop playing Splatoon.

I'm starting to think that Splatoon should come with a warning label. Its crazy addictive. I'm pretty pumped for Splatfest. I'm going to pick team dog since it seems that most of the gaming world picks cats. Means I should have some awesome battles.

@KBFloYd: Its all about the Seekers for me rather than my special. Been managing to hold a team back when reinforcements come to the rescue a good portion of the time.

@jg4xchamp: Not to be that guy, but Destiny's skill ceiling is a solid low, not a solid no. Trials of Osiris (PVP) and Prison of Elders (PVE) are really sorting out the men from the boys.

Blah blah yes it took more than $60 to get there blah blah Aaron you're spending $140 for a game to get good u fuckwit blah blah

Destiny is broken right now because of a Hunter class exploit.

@jg4xchamp I'm not going to argue some nonsense over the validity of breaking down the many variables of a video game and judging it in the form of a number that really only fits one persons opinion. And I can't speak to Splatoon's shooting mecahnics or its depth, but Unreal wasn't lacking in depth, neither is Counterstrike, neither is Battlefield for that matter as a shooter, neither was Tribes Ascend a few years ago, neither was Planetside 2, neither was Team Fortress 2, and frankly The Last of Us has its own variables to go with as well.

So you are trying to judge a game you haven't even touched based on a feature-list that of course doesn't take into account even the most basic aspect of a game, which is the gameplay and the level design. And despite of that, you feel you have the authority to tell us (the ones who have played the game) if we are right or wrong about it being that good. Modern videogaming, awesome.

@jg4xchamp

And you would argue the gameplay is fantastic right?

Then likewise the game has no excuse for why it doesn't have voice chat when voice chat should be there, it has no excuse for why it launched with less maps than the average shooter, much less the best ones, it launched with less modes, it launched without the ability to have private lobbies, it launched without the ability to squad up with your friends in a type of game where you would want to play with your friends.

Look, those features you mention are there to enhance the experience, and they're welcomed if they're there. But if the experience is already superior because of a revolutionary gameplay, then all of that is absolutely secondary.

The voice chat for example. Are you aware that Splatoon consumes a ****-ton of bandwidth compared to your average shooter? It not only has to take into account where the current projectiles that are being fired are going to impact, but also where have they impacted and the surface they've painted (and the colour it's been painted with). Would the same game with the option of voice chat be better than it is? Of course, and it would also be better if instead of a 720p it had 4K native resolution.

But would the cost of adding voice-chat be worth it if that came at the expense of the good online infrastructure the game has? No, of course it wouldn't.

@jg4xchamp Those are short comings it should not have, and at 60 bucks plenty of people can argue it being a pretty lousy. I dig Vanquish way the **** more than I ever will a Gears of War, but I'm not going to lie and say you don't get more for your money out of Gears of War, that much has to be an accepted fact, unless one of its things were straight broken.

So now reviews have to be based on a "content per dollar" criteria? Or when you say more you mean "polygons per dollar"? And how do you define "content per dollar"?

Would you say TLOU campaign has more content than the one found in Splatoon? If judged by its duration or the size of its environments without any doubt it has more content, if judged by the level design and the number of different situations the game presents to you I would say the first of the five main hubs the Splatoon single player campaign is divided into has more content than the whole TLOU campaing.

So according to your "objective opinion" a 5x5 km^2 open world where you just have to walk from point A to point B is much better objectively than a game that has little corridors full of obstacles that bring the game's gameplay to their limit. Well, this is your opinion, but you can be sure this is not objective no matter how you look at it.

@jg4xchamp I'll argue Vanquish is the better game, and if you want to argue Splatoon is a better game than Battlefield or Gears of War or whatever, be my guest. I wasn't having that debate.

Well then, if it is a better game, it deserves a better score, don't you think? You're saying Splatoon doesn't deserve the 8 it got because it lacks what it lacks. I'm saying that this 8 is unfairly low because it puts Splatoon below much worse game that have more (useless in terms of gameplay) content.

@jg4xchamp I'm not debating with opinion, not debating with emotion, certainly not debating with hyperbole, merely stated some fact that any rational human being should be able to accept. Splatoon can be multiple things. It can be a good game (great game in your case) while being underdeveloped. Because we have more than enough examples of how Nintendo did less than the bare minimum when it came to offering a robust online experience when said game launched or even today on June 11, 2015.

What you seem unable to understand is that "objectivity" is not a feature list. Even without arguing with you that subjective aspects like "fun" are of course a major factor when reviewing something, your concept of what's objective is pretty limited in my opinion.

Splatoon has objectively speaking a much lower entry level than any other shooter. This is not debatable, you have to be much better to shoot a someone that's also trying to kill you than to shoot at everywhere you want because every single metre of ground adds points to your team's score, and what's better, you win based on that and not the number of kills nor anything else.

And thanks to the fact that the ground covered in ink not only serves the purpose of adding points, but also gives you a definitive advantage, the game can get really, really deep in terms of what's achievable. So while the entry point is that low, in the end you're aiming while taking cover from the enemy's shots (like in any other shooter) but then you're also platforming, improvising strategies with the ink, even infiltrating into the enemy territory while avoiding direct combat...

So that's there, and you can't ignore it. Games are much more than just a list of feature-sets and generic content, I wouldn't even dare to compare Splatoon with TLOU hour for hour when 1 hour with Splatoon gives me more fun than 10 hours in TLOU. And without voice-chat.

@freezamite: We're getting some translation issues, I'm not arguing anything with reviews, I haven't argued the games score, I have never argued what the game should score, I do not give a flying **** about video game scores. My tastes and posting history on this forum will more than cover that end. So whatever reason you are arguing review criteria with me is lost to me, if that's an error on my end, I apologize, otherwise you're missing my actual complaint over some number bullshit. Likewise read my text I am not questioning the quality of the games or your ability to enjoy said game, more the apologizing done for a game that is objectively missing shit it should have. Not with arguments built around reason or logic, but excuses and apologies that shouldn't be made for a company that is widely regarded as one of the best, if not the best. Might want to stop putting words into my mouth that I didn't actually say.

But there are facts to accept. It is a fact that the game launched with less content, less modes, and missed features that should obviously be there in an online game in 2015. Not because "everyone will use them", but because having the option is better than no option. I never asked for team deathmatch, I didn't ask for Capture the Flag, I didn't ask for VIP, I didn't ask for a zombies mode. That would be asking for generic content that means nothing. I asked for the game to provide me my money's worth of content in terms of maps and mode at launch, because a multiplayer game with 5 maps and 1 game mode? Is wildly limited in comparison to other games.

It's one thing when Dota 2 only has one map, Dota 2 has depth for days that no shooter is actually competing with. A third person shooter? lets get real, it needs map variety, even if the matches go fairly quickly.

Asking for 4k resolution is an impractical thing that consoles aren't actually strong enough for, much less the Wiiu. Voice chat is shit that consoles from gen 6 could offer, and Nintendo simply doesn't. Major difference, not comparable.

And no I do not think video games should be scored by content by dollar, I do not think Gears deserves more praise than Vanquish, on my scale Vanquish would do fine. That said this isn't as simple as black and white, in a scenario where lets say I dug Splatoon's gameplay as much as you did, I would hold it against the game for launching with such light content. Vanquish chooses not to have multiplayer, that's one thing, Splatoon chooses to have multiplayer and then half asses it in areas that it shouldn't. My ability to speak to my friends should matter, because I prefer playing mp games with my friends. My inability to be on the same team with them should fucking matter, because I like playing a mp game with my friends. Did those lack of features have no impact on my enjoyment of the game in that scenario? They did didn't they? In key areas that effect this type of game. Now how much I would bitch about said short coming comes down to my appreciation for the gameplay, what is there, and yes the sp as well. Like I said I wasn't arguing score, just wild apologizing that were made against things that weren't "hate" or whatever, it was stating facts.

As for The Last of Us, if I was arguing its superiority or inferiority, I would definitely focus on the gameplay. And unlike you apparently, I actually dig a lot of the gameplay in the Last of us, even in the multiplayer.

Bottom line: Here are things it doesn't have and here are things it's holding out on me until August either for some arbitrary ass reason or because the game wasn't finished in time for the May 29th release.

'You're getting free dlc" is not a good defense, because it's not actual post game DLC like other mp shooters. It launched with less modes and maps than those shooters that have DLC. It couldn't get away with that bs. Hence why Titanfall could get away with map DLC, but couldn't do it with game modes (it had like 3 when it launched).

"I don't need voice chat" : Good for you, it should still be an option, it's a mainstay in shooters, and assuming you get 3 other people to play with you that will take it as seriously as you will, yeah communicating with your mouth and ears with your teammates is more effective than simply trusting on unspoken instinct or design logic. I don't care how busy the game can be, when you get good at a game you learn to manage that shit. People manage all the different meta systems in Dota, while communicating, and having their finger tips dance all over that keyboard when necessary. So the complexity argument doesn't fly

"you'll be able to play with your friends in August" : That should have been fucking there since day one. That is like multiplayer 101 shit at this point. That is the whole point of multiplayer is to play with your friends, together, especially in a team game. And it is ridiculous that the game doesn't have them.

I'm not saying you can't like the game, but you can't dismiss those short comings or lame moves by Nintendo with just "well the game is good". Plenty of good things have shitty things about them. It doesn't have to be one or the other.

Likewise when the person writing the review mentions said short comings as a short coming, yeah it had some impact on the score. To say it didn't is to ignore any sense of logic what so ever. So again can I get something based around facts and logic, and not opinions and emotions. Otherwise agree to disagree and move on. Even I'm tired of this thread.

@FrozenLiquid: Obviously goes without saying I'm speaking to Destiny vanilla. Game sucked way too much to give it a chance on its lame expansions.