Support NeoGAF

[Crash331]

I still fail to see anything baffling, but ok. Let's try again.

We have a few ways to do it. We can do random map, you bring 1 loadout to work for every possibility. We have random map but you pick loadout depending on map and mode, so 3x12=36 options. Pretty good! But then we have this baffling choice of locking down two maps, which change everytime. This means you have to prep for these two maps. Let's say we have map A, B, C. I may want Loadout 1 for A and B, but not for B and C, so we make Loadout 2 for that. None of the loadouts fit that great in case for A and C either, so we create Loadout C. And this is just with one mode in mind; the optimal loadout might change depending on mode. So that's 9 possible loadout just by combining 3 maps, with 9 maps not brought up, meaning hundreds of possible loadouts.

You might think this is baffling logic, and there is no way anyone would actually do that, but I know first hand I haven't brought Slosher again since the particular combo I experienced, and I haven't even begun to care about what clothes I wear and the effects they give. I hope I finally make some sense and if I somehow don't, that we at least can agree to disagree.



You can read this reply as well then, altho I don't think it will sway you!

Each map doesn't need a custom loadout. You have have 5-10 premade loadouts that you customize outside of matchmaking so you don't waste people's time. When a map comes up, you have 30 seconds to choose from those 5-10 loadouts.

Come on, son. Call of Duty did this in 2005. It's not a complicated concept.

 

[danm999]

Hey just like your criticism.

The problem with this thread premise is every single decision can be explained rationally.

The whole game is designed like a tv show, and Nintendo reminds of this constantly. They want you to pick up and play for a few mins and set it down. The unskippable intro is a reminder, the map rotations are a reminder, the specific scheduling of game modes are a reminder.

This game is not meant to be binge played, and that is on purpose. They don't want one trick ponies ruining the game. They want to keep it as fair as possible and as easy to jump in for anyone as possible. The tv show, rotation of content approach allows that.

So in the age of digital distribution and Netflix, Nintendo opted to model its online multiplayer experience on network television.

And this was a "rational decision".

 

[KingSnake]

I still fail to see anything baffling, but ok. Let's try again.

We have a few ways to do it. We can do random map, you bring 1 loadout to work for every possibility. We have random map but you pick loadout depending on map and mode, so 3x12=36 options. Pretty good! But then we have this baffling choice of locking down two maps, which change everytime. This means you have to prep for these two maps. Let's say we have map A, B, C. I may want Loadout 1 for A and B, but not for B and C, so we make Loadout 2 for that. None of the loadouts fit that great in case for A and C either, so we create Loadout C. And this is just with one mode in mind; the optimal loadout might change depending on mode. So that's 9 possible loadout just by combining 3 maps, with 9 maps not brought up, meaning hundreds of possible loadouts.

You might think this is baffling logic, and there is no way anyone would actually do that, but I know first hand I haven't brought Slosher again since the particular combo I experienced, and I haven't even begun to care about what clothes I wear and the effects they give. I hope I finally make some sense and if I somehow don't, that we at least can agree to disagree.



You can read this reply as well then, altho I don't think it will sway you!

I think you are over-complicating things.

You can anyhow pick your weapon before entering modes and abilities are rather suited in relation to modes not maps, so it's good that you left those out of the discussion anyhow.

You go in turf war and you enter a lobby and you see what maps comes up and you have 30 seconds to decide on the weapon. It's very simple.

The way you describe it sounds like you need to build a gun for every map, when you have actually the weapons you buy and you know already what for they are good. Why are you talking about custom loadouts, this I don't understand?

 

[tengiants]

I still fail to see anything baffling, but ok. Let's try again.

We have a few ways to do it. We can do random map, you bring 1 loadout to work for every possibility. We have random map but you pick loadout depending on map and mode, so 3x12=36 options. Pretty good! But then we have this baffling choice of locking down two maps, which change everytime. This means you have to prep for these two maps. Let's say we have map A, B, C. I may want Loadout 1 for A and B, but not for B and C, so we make Loadout 2 for that. None of the loadouts fit that great in case for A and C either, so we create Loadout C. And this is just with one mode in mind; the optimal loadout might change depending on mode. So that's 9 possible loadout just by combining 3 maps, with 9 maps not brought up, meaning hundreds of possible loadouts.

You might think this is baffling logic, and there is no way anyone would actually do that, but I know first hand I haven't brought Slosher again since the particular combo I experienced, and I haven't even begun to care about what clothes I wear and the effects they give. I hope I finally make some sense and if I somehow don't, that we at least can agree to disagree.



You can read this reply as well then, altho I don't think it will sway you!

The thread title was changed, we look stupid now. I'm bowing out.

 

[Chauzu]

Each map doesn't need a custom loadout. You have have 5-10 premade loadouts that you customize outside of matchmaking so you don't waste people's time. When a map comes up, you have 30 seconds to choose from those 5-10 loadouts.

Come on, son. Call of Duty did this in 2005. It's not a complicated concept.

As said, definately not trying to argue Splatoon is doing it the way it should be done. I just think it's interesting to see the route the game took. Only thing I do believe tho is that it isn't a clueless or baffling decision, I think it's a factor to the series' success. I am sure some will say it holds the series back (and a lot of stuff probably do), but that's my personal take on it.

 

[Gravy Boat]

As said, definately not trying to argue Splatoon is doing it the way it should be done. I just think it's interesting to see the route the game took. Only thing I do believe tho is that it isn't a clueless or baffling decision, I think it's a factor to the series' success. I am sure some will say it holds the series back (and a lot of stuff probably do), but that's my personal take on it.

It absolutely is not and I really wish people would start showing evidence every time they bring things up. It's popular because the gameplay is unique and very enjoyable, not because Nintendo is limiting what maps they can play. Splatoon would easily be just as popular as it is now if it rotated all the maps, and didn't lock people out of certain playlists at certain times for no reason.

 

[Papercuts]

Oh, I get what Chauzu is saying now. Basically by having a group of maps the loadout that excels in those 2 is going to be unique instead of always having your 'best' weapon.

So if map A is one with more vertical vantage points and bigger sightlines where the charger (or w/e the sniper-ish weapon is called) but map B is way more close quarters (good for something like the roller) the effectiveness of using the sniper drops since you might be put on a map it isn't suited well for, but the roller isn't great on map A either.

But to me that just makes even more issues, to the point where it adds a much higher amount of risk to already more niche weapons and to me would promote just sticking with jack of all trades weapons.

 

[Chauzu]

It absolutely is not and I really wish people would start showing evidence every time they bring things up. It's popular because the gameplay is unique and very enjoyable, not because Nintendo is limiting what maps they can play. Splatoon would easily be just as popular as it is now if it rotated all the maps, and didn't lock people out of certain playlists at certain times for no reason.

I mean, you don't feel the need to share the evidence proving the contrary. That is just my opinion and I am happy to change it.

Oh, I get what Chauzu is saying now. Basically by having a group of maps the loadout that excels in those 2 is going to be unique instead of always having your 'best' weapon.

So if map A is one with more vertical vantage points and bigger sightlines where the charger (or w/e the sniper-ish weapon is called) but map B is way more close quarters (good for something like the roller) the effectiveness of using the sniper drops since you might be put on a map it isn't suited well for, but the roller isn't great on map A either.

But to me that just makes even more issues, to the point where it adds a much higher amount of risk to already more niche weapons and to me would promote just sticking with jack of all trades weapons.

Thanks for understanding and painting a better picture! Again, definately not saying this is a perfect system by any means, I just think it's interesting and one that suit me personally, but more because I like being stuck on the same maps for an extended time to really get into it.

 

[KingSnake]

Oh, I get what Chauzu is saying now. Basically by having a group of maps the loadout that excels in those 2 is going to be unique instead of always having your 'best' weapon.

So if map A is one with more vertical vantage points and bigger sightlines where the charger (or w/e the sniper-ish weapon is called) but map B is way more close quarters (good for something like the roller) the effectiveness of using the sniper drops since you might be put on a map it isn't suited well for, but the roller isn't great on map A either.

But to me that just makes even more issues, to the point where it adds a much higher amount of risk to already more niche weapons and to me would promote just sticking with jack of all trades weapons.

But that works just in theory. In practice most of the maps work pretty similar for a lot of weapons and only Moray Towers and Port Mackerel are somehow different in the sense that first is great for chargers and awful for rollers and the second is the other way around. Still you could use Aerospray MG on any map and you're guaranteed to score great scores in Turf War for example. So the challenge is not really there. Instead of providing some additional challenge this locking actually encourage a lot of people to just play safe. I think that given the possibility to chose a weapon based on the map would actually make more people use more weapons.

 

[Papercuts]

But that works just in theory. In practice most of the maps work pretty similar for a lot of weapons and only Moray Towers and Port Mackerel are somehow different in the sense that first is great for chargers and awful for rollers and the second is the other way around. Still you could use Aerospray MG on any map and you're guaranteed to score great scores in Turf War for example. So the challenge is not really there. Instead of providing some additional challenge this locking actually encourage a lot of people to just play safe.

Yeah, I haven't played 2 beyond the splattest stuff so I'm not sure how the map designs actually work out but as an underlying idea I can...kinda understand it atleast which is progress over me being totally baffled before. I will still be baffled at the party up with friend setup though.

The play it safe thing is what I recall happening to me with the first game, just play a generally good weapon and you're basically set, but as someone who likes longer sessions in games I get quickly burned out by repeating the maps either way.

 

[Wowfunhappy]

I mean, you don't feel the need to share the evidence proving the contrary. That is just my opinion and I am happy to change it.

People spend their careers trying to figure out why a product was or was not successful, and they still end up wrong more often than not. We are never going to have definitive "evidence" as to what made Splatoon a success; it's all conjecture.

(Incidentally, this is the same problem we end up with whenever a piracy discussion comes up. "There is no evidence that piracy leads to lost sales." That's technically correct, but only because it's almost impossible to determine why a given game did or did not sell.)

 

[Patch13]

It absolutely is not and I really wish people would start showing evidence every time they bring things up. It's popular because the gameplay is unique and very enjoyable, not because Nintendo is limiting what maps they can play. Splatoon would easily be just as popular as it is now if it rotated all the maps, and didn't lock people out of certain playlists at certain times for no reason.

I don't know. Splatoon sold 30% more copies in my house because the youngest member of the household can actually jump into games and get matched up against equally skilled(?) opponents without having ask the grown ups for help with loadouts or server browsers or any of the other stuff that has gone "missing" from shooters since the grand old days of trying to remember what abbreviation belongs to which game mode in the Enemy Territory server browser.

I don't know whether the kids 'n "casuals" playing a game that they otherwise wouldn't balance out the grognars who aren't playing because it doesn't have Battlefield: Modern Pietas' exact feature set (Ooh: ancient Roman history reference! Five points for Griffindor!) I do know that picking a weapon that matches both maps is an interesting puzzle that also mitigates issues with a weapon being unbalanced on a single map. And I can make up reasons why the devs might have made the other decisions that they did. Whatever.

It's usually a mistake to say that a game will be unpopular because some segment of the forumite base doesn't like it, though. It never hurts a game to appeal to as many people as possible, but it also doesn't hurt a game to make some choices about what to keep and what to throw out from games that have gone before. Splatoon makes some choices that make some grizzled veterans happy (raises hand), and make other grizzled veterans sad (though I suspect that there are people in this thread who weren't even born when Doom dropped, so I'm not sure how actually grizzled the grizzled are). ymmv. To each their own. Etc. It's just silly to see people making assumptions about Nintendo being naive or whatever, when they're just making decisions that you personally disagree with, nothing more and nothing less ...

 

[dr.rocktopus]

I loved the first game but did eventually fall out of it after lending it to a friend for like a year lol. Didn't really look at previews much, the sequel looked like it was going to be more of what I liked so it was an instant purchase.

Caveat Emptor right?

After Splatoon I went on playing online team shooters more intently, and ended up playing Gears 4 and Overwatch (playing them mostly poorly) and man does it highlight how antiquated how Splatoon and its sequel are with regards to the online infrastructure. So many weird decisions.

Weapon loadouts are absolutely important. It doesn't sound like we know for sure how S2 matchmakes if it bases it on weapons or not. Even then, allowing weapon switching would add tactical depth to the game. Getting pinned by a charger? Can't lay enough paint? Change to compensate! The game already keeps track of weapon proficiency with the freshness level. I think wanting to win and "pubstomping" are not necessarily always related. There's already griping over monster Japanese players in the game, it's not like getting crushed on Turf War/Ranked is anything new to Splatoon.

Map rotation needs to be bigger or just go completely random. Random and letting the system populate would avoid community voting going to the same map always. Even then, I right now have a 50% chance of playing the last map I just played with no say. At least give me better odds or feel like I have a say lol

I don't play Salmon Run but locking players out of a mode is obscene, and is representative of the curious design decisions in the game as a whole. Yes there might be an angle of applied logic. That doesn't mean that logic is necessarily right. If so many other games can handle this, and the history is there (through other games) to back up things like partying and being on the same team as friends, map selection, weapon loadouts and voice chat which didn't require developing two separate modes to implement, why the change? I think history has shown players will definitely wait for a game configured to their wants versus getting something analogous to BoTW's Dubious Food that sorta does the job.

Splatoon 1 was well supported, so I hope with time the game will get better and more feature filled. The two hour map rotation change at least gives me some hope they are listening.

 

[ShadowSoldier89]

I don't know. Splatoon sold 30% more copies in my house because the youngest member of the household can actually jump into games and get matched up against equally skilled(?) opponents without having ask the grown ups for help with loadouts or server browsers or any of the other stuff that has gone "missing" from shooters since the grand old days of trying to remember what abbreviation belongs to which game mode in the Enemy Territory server browser.

I don't know whether the kids 'n "casuals" playing a game that they otherwise wouldn't balance out the grognars who aren't playing because it doesn't have Battlefield: Modern Pietas' exact feature set (Ooh: ancient Roman history reference! Five points for Griffindor!) I do know that picking a weapon that matches both maps is an interesting puzzle that also mitigates issues with a weapon being unbalanced on a single map. And I can make up reasons why the devs might have made the other decisions that they did. Whatever.

It's usually a mistake to say that a game will be unpopular because some segment of the forumite base doesn't like it, though. It never hurts a game to appeal to as many people as possible, but it also doesn't hurt a game to make some choices about what to keep and what to throw out from games that have gone before. Splatoon makes some choices that make some grizzled veterans happy (raises hand), and make other grizzled veterans sad (though I suspect that there are people in this thread who weren't even born when Doom dropped, so I'm not sure how actually grizzled the grizzled are). ymmv. To each their own. Etc. It's just silly to see people making assumptions about Nintendo being naive or whatever, when they're just making decisions that you personally disagree with, nothing more and nothing less ...

playing games as long as I have makes it painfully obvious how much of the advancements in multiplayer infrastructure design Nintendo has completely ignored with Splatoon. A multiplayer game that is better played solo than with friends is just poor design.

 

[mazillion]

If they made the post game stat screens skippable that would be a huge QoL change. I hate having to wait around for it to finish before I can re-queue. Most of the time i'm not interesting it seeing it.

I wish they took a cue from other games and just let you view the prior match stats with a button press while you're waiting for players.

 

[Gravy Boat]

I mean, you don't feel the need to share the evidence proving the contrary. That is just my opinion and I am happy to change it.

My evidence is the 2 decades of other successful shooters that don't restrict what maps people can play on, and don't close down entire modes at random points throughout the day. We have tons of examples that these design choices work, we have nothing to say that Splatoons choices (map rotation, locking Salmon Run etc) contribute in any way to it's success. Infact by claiming that, you're actually doing the really solid gameplay a disservice.

 

[Chauzu]

My evidence is the 2 decades of other successful shooters that don't restrict what maps people can play on, and don't close down entire modes at random points throughout the day.

How is that any evidence when Splatoon is one of the most succesful new IP's in recent times? If anything it shows online shooters can have various models, Overwatch is another succesful new shooter that has its own spin, if more traditional.

 

[Renegade Frost]

playing games as long as I have makes it painfully obvious how much of the advancements in multiplayer infrastructure design Nintendo has completely ignored with Splatoon. A multiplayer game that is better played solo than with friends is just poor design.

A multiplayer game better played solo will always have higher player retention though. It simply requires less "groups' of people for people to be active and invested in a game. Come on, use your brain. Splatoon isnt better played solo anyway so that entire premise is bunk.


As for your other comments:

Those advancements were made in a different environment with different goals in mind. Nintendo is not a western developer, they're not going to structure their game the same way.
This is the animal crossing developers, they're not going to look at Halo and Call of Duty to determine how to make a video game.

They had one goal in mind, get people to play the videogame continously. People's handwringing as a vocal minority on neogaf is not gonna change that

The idea that games should follow the same set of rules and standards is how we get a homogenous AAA scene that doesnt fundamentally understand the reason people buy their videogames.

There's no point in sticking with tradition.

My evidence is the 2 decades of other successful shooters that don't restrict what maps people can play on, and don't close down entire modes at random points throughout the day.

Counter Point: Those 2 decades of shooters have people who have a very large amount of complaints about games, and lots of those shooters get abandoned because of those complaints. This is why lots of people hate COD/ Battelfield Ect.

The point is you can serve different groups with very different models. Pro's and Con's guy.


I dont even understand why people would want loadouts and shit in the lobbies for Splatoon. This is a fast game, you get in and then get out, if you want to change something you exit the lobby and change it up, then get back in before the 4 hours are up and the game changes the modes available.

I never have trouble finding a match in splatoon and getting to it quickly because of how its built, thats a giant PRO.

 

[Patch13]

playing games as long as I have makes it painfully obvious how much of the advancements in multiplayer infrastructure design Nintendo has completely ignored with Splatoon. A multiplayer game that is better played solo than with friends is just poor design.

The weirdest thing about this thread is that one of the changes between Splatoon 1 and 2 was to make it a bit easier to queue with friends. You just create a room, add as many friends as you want to it, open up the matchmaking for other people to come in, and the game fills out the room for you. There isn't any funky situation where you have just two friends, and you get stuck playing 3 on 3 matches the whole time.

The only "downside" is that you might wind up on opposite teams during some of the matches. But, as the Terminator said, what is best in life is to crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and also splat you friends in the back of the head.

 

[Trup1aya]

The purpose behind map rotation is to keep users frequently playing Splatoon at different points of the day. You could pick it up in the morning and play Tower Control on Moray Towers and you can play it again in the evening and play Splat Zones on Inkblot Art Academy. While it's perhaps artificial, Splatoon creates a feeling of variation in this sense and it certainly worked to retain a very active player base on Wii U.

It's a tactic for longevity that I wouldn't call "behind the times" as it's proven to work in Splatoon 1. I understand how you may be annoyed by it but i quite like all modes having an active playerbase meanwhile in other shooters I struggle to find matches in certain playlists. Is it a flawless scheme? No, but it does what it sets out to do.

This same goal can be achieved without moronic artificial tactics.

rocket league, for example, lets people check of which modes they are willing to search, and matches People with overlapping interests.

Getting to play what you want when you want is better for longevity than, these time locks.

 

[Gravy Boat]

How is that any evidence when Splatoon is one of the most succesful new IP's in recent times? If anything it shows online shooters can have various models, Overwatch is another succesful new shooter that has its own spin, if more traditional.

Read my edit, we have tons of evidence that games can be successful without these restrictions, and no evidence that these restrictions contribute to a games success. Splatoon is successful because the gameplay is great, not because I can only play 2 maps at a time and need to pray that Salmon Run is available when I have time to play, or any of the other questionable choices they've made, like voice chat, not being able to party up with friends in the casual mode etc.

Rocket League is way more successful than Splatoon was, and probably ever will be, and it gives people tons of choice of what they want to play.

 

[zenspider]

I think you are over-complicating things.

You can anyhow pick your weapon before entering modes and abilities are rather suited in relation to modes not maps, so it's good that you left those out of the discussion anyhow.

You go in turf war and you enter a lobby and you see what maps comes up and you have 30 seconds to decide on the weapon. It's very simple.

The way you describe it sounds like you need to build a gun for every map, when you have actually the weapons you buy and you know already what for they are good. Why are you talking about custom loadouts, this I don't understand?

That's about as long as it takes to back out and re-queue, and would bog down every public match.

 

[7Th]

How is that any evidence when Splatoon is one of the most succesful new IP's in recent times? If anything it shows online shooters can have various models, Overwatch is another succesful new shooter that has its own spin, if more traditional.

How is Overwatch comparable to Splatoon when it has all the online functionality you can expect of a modern shooter?

 

[Gravy Boat]

Counter Point: Those 2 decades of shooters have people who have a very large amount of complaints about games, and lots of those shooters get abandoned because of those complaints. This is why lots of people hate COD/ Battelfield Ect.

The point is you can serve different groups with very different models. Pro's and Con's guy.


I dont even understand why people would want loadouts and shit in the lobbies for Splatoon. This is a fast game, you get in and then get out, if you want to change something you exit the lobby and change it up, then get back in before the 4 hours are up and the game changes the modes available.

I never have trouble finding a match in splatoon and getting to it quickly because of how its built, thats a giant PRO.

People hate CoD because of the gameplay, not because there are too many maps in rotation. People would hate it a hell of a lot more if it only offered them 2 maps at a time.

And you don't understand why someone would rather be able to change loadouts inbetween matches without needing to back out of the lobby? Come on, it's like asking why people would want to use their remote instead of getting up to change the TV channel. It's a QOL thing that every other game offers. You never having trouble finding a match has absolutely nothing to do with only have 2 maps in rotation at a time. It doesn't matter if there's 2 maps or 200 maps, as long as there's only 1 playlist, matchmaking time and success rate won't be affected.

 

[Renegade Frost]

How is Overwatch comparable to Splatoon when it has all the online functionality you can expect of a modern shooter?

Different design goals should create different expectations. Just because a game's a shooter doesnt mean it has to function like every other one out there.

So in the age of digital distribution and Netflix, Nintendo opted to model its online multiplayer experience on network television.

And this was a "rational decision".

Not everything is meant to be binged in life. Live a balanced lifestyle. Otherwise you'll get stupid prizes for playing stupid games. (The prize for not going to sleep on time is a fantastic one, its called an early death)

I think you are over-complicating things.

You can anyhow pick your weapon before entering modes and abilities are rather suited in relation to modes not maps, so it's good that you left those out of the discussion anyhow.

You go in turf war and you enter a lobby and you see what maps comes up and you have 30 seconds to decide on the weapon. It's very simple.

The way you describe it sounds like you need to build a gun for every map, when you have actually the weapons you buy and you know already what for they are good. Why are you talking about custom loadouts, this I don't understand?

You dont even need to go to the lobby, you already know which maps are available and what weapons you need before the game boots up because you watch the squid sisters tell you.

The lobby is pretty quick.

 

[Chauzu]

Read my edit, we have tons of evidence that games can be successful without these restrictions, and no evidence that these restrictions contribute to a games success. Splatoon is successful because the gameplay is great, not because I can only play 2 maps at a time and need to pray that Salmon Run is available when I have time to play, or any of the other questionable choices they've made, like voice chat, not being able to party up with friends in the casual mode etc.

Rocket League is way more successful than Splatoon was, and probably ever will be, and it gives people tons of choice of what they want to play.

I'm still waiting for the evidence that Splatoon in particular would be more succesful. Paint it however you want, in the end it is just a hypothesis. My hypothesis is based on myself being one of those people having a hard time getting into a game like Overwatch but am hooked by Splatoon by the way map and mode rotation works. I accept that I might just be a minority and Splatoon would be even bigger if they just copied what everybody else did. But I will need to see evidence pointing towards that. Until then, we'll have to agree to disagree!

Also I'll be the first to quote and say Salmon Run being on a timer is idiotic.

How is Overwatch comparable to Splatoon when it has all the online functionality you can expect of a modern shooter?

Huh? Is this bait?

 

[Renegade Frost]

People hate CoD because of the gameplay, not because there are too many maps in rotation. People would hate it a hell of a lot more if it only offered them 2 maps at a time.

And you don't understand why someone would rather be able to change loadouts inbetween matches without needing to back out of the lobby? Come on, it's like asking why people would want to use their remote instead of getting up to change the TV channel. It's a QOL thing that every other game offers.

How is it a qol of life thing? When you're in the lobby all you do is hit the plus button and you go to your weapon screen. Do you people even play Splatoon? The entire game is incredibly snappy. There's literally zero downtime doing anything.

If you're not in the lobby during Splatoon its because you're playing single player or derping around in the actual Plaza. Or spending 30 seconds waiting for a match.

No dude, I see people bitch about everything in COD related to how its set up.People bitch about people only playing Zombies, X mode not having enough players, this and that. Its not just the gameplay, its about the actual playing of the game.

 

[Gravy Boat]

I'm still waiting for the evidence that Splatoon in particular would be more succesful. Paint it however you want, in the end it is just a hypothesis. My hypothesis is based on myself being one of those people having a hard time getting into a game like Overwatch but am hooked by Splatoon by the way map and mode rotation works. I accept that I might just be a minority and Splatoon would be even bigger if they just copied what everybody else did. But I will need to see evidence pointing towards that. Until then, we'll have to agree to disagree!

Also I'll be the first to quote and say Salmon Run being on a timer is idiotic.

Well you're the one that started off by saying the game is more successful because of these decisions, so you'd need to prove that first. The reason you got hooked on Splatoon and not OW is almost certainly because of the actual gameplay, and not the map rotation. You would literally be the first person I've ever heard say they stopped playing OW, or any FPS infact, because there are too many maps in rotation.

The evidence is there, we know that these bizzare choices are not needed to make a game successful. I don't need to do anything to prove that because all you need to do is look at any other major FPS of the last 20 years. You're the one that needs to prove that going against those decisions makes a game more popular than it otherwise would have been, which you can't do.

No dude, I see people bitch about everything in COD related to how its set up.People bitch about people only playing Zombies, X mode not having enough players, this and that. Its not just the gameplay, its about the actual playing of the game.

Find me a single person that bitches about any FPS specifically because there are too many maps in rotation and it makes the game less enjoyable (aside from the guy above, who would literally be the first). Not enough players in a playlist has absolutely nothing to do with map rotation

 

[AndrewDean84xX]

The only thing I can't get behind is the timed Salmon Run. No issue with anything else. But even then, I figured out that I can do local Salmon Run with my daughter at any time, so even that isn't as big of an issue.

 

[LordKasual]

Threads like these are why I haven't bothered buying the game yet.

Never owned a WiiU, but i've spent time playing the online modes for Smash 4. They are fucking dreadful.

No idea why Nintendo appears to have an allergic adversion to good netplay design.

 

[Renegade Frost]

Well you're the one that started off by saying the game is more successful because of these decisions, so you'd need to prove that first. The reason you got hooked on Splatoon and not OW is almost certainly because of the actual gameplay, and not the map rotation. You would literally be the first person I've ever heard say they stopped playing OW, or any FPS infact, because there are too many maps in rotation.

The evidence is there, we know that these bizzare choices are not needed to make a game successful. I don't need to do anything to prove that because all you need to do is look at any other major FPS of the last 20 years.

I think it has more to do with the fact that Splatoon wastes less of his time.

This same goal can be achieved without moronic artificial tactics.

rocket league, for example, lets people check of which modes they are willing to search, and matches People with overlapping interests.

Getting to play what you want when you want is better for longevity than, these time locks.

I disagree, I think the way things set up now leads to more weapon experimentation and continued engagement over longer periods of time for the people who play the game.

Splatoon ensures there's some level of equality in how everybody plays. Its great if you prefer unfettered capitalism but Gay space communism is always 3000 times better.

Threads like these are why I haven't bothered buying the game yet.

Never owned a WiiU, but i've spent time playing the online modes for Smash 4. They are fucking dreadful.

No idea why Nintendo appears to have an allergic adversion to good netplay design.

Smash 4 is designed by Sakurai and Namco. Neither of those people are employed by nintendo.

 

[Fireblend]

I like everything except the Salmon Run times, which are getting better. Kind of surprised this thread has gone on for so long, what is there to discuss beyond I like it/I don't?

 

[Alienous]

I like everything except the Salmon Run times, which are getting better. Kind of surprised this thread has gone on for so long, what is there to discuss beyond I like it/I don't?

The merits or lackthereof when it comes to the 'bizarre design decisions', such as Splatoon 2 splitting friends between matches helping players with codependency issues.

 

[DrWong]

I think it has more to do with the fact that Splatoon wastes less of his time.



I disagree, I think the way things set up now leads to more weapon experimentation and continued engagement over longer periods of time for the people who play the game.

Splatoon ensures there's some level of equality in how everybody plays. Its great if you prefer unfettered capitalism but Gay space communism is always 3000 times better.



Smash 4 is designed by Sakurai and Namco. Neither of those people are employed by nintendo.

Ah ah!
Iain M. Banks/Culture books flash.

 

[ShadowSoldier89]

How is it a qol of life thing? When you're in the lobby all you do is hit the plus button and you go to your weapon screen. Do you people even play Splatoon? The entire game is incredibly snappy. There's literally zero downtime doing anything.

If you're not in the lobby during Splatoon its because you're playing single player or derping around in the actual Plaza. Or spending 30 seconds waiting for a match.

No dude, I see people bitch about everything in COD related to how its set up.People bitch about people only playing Zombies, X mode not having enough players, this and that. Its not just the gameplay, its about the actual playing of the game.

that lovely screen you sit on while joining a friend because you can't pair up before turf war. Lots of fun downtime there and you cant even edit your weapon loadout...or do fucking anything. At least in splat one you could play the dumbass mini game on the gamepad

The weirdest thing about this thread is that one of the changes between Splatoon 1 and 2 was to make it a bit easier to queue with friends. You just create a room, add as many friends as you want to it, open up the matchmaking for other people to come in, and the game fills out the room for you. There isn't any funky situation where you have just two friends, and you get stuck playing 3 on 3 matches the whole time.

The only "downside" is that you might wind up on opposite teams during some of the matches. But, as the Terminator said, what is best in life is to crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and also splat you friends in the back of the head.

For league battle, not for turf war. And playing against my friends is pointless. Might as well just solo queue and sit on discord to chat.

A multiplayer game better played solo will always have higher player retention though. It simply requires less "groups' of people for people to be active and invested in a game. Come on, use your brain. Splatoon isnt better played solo anyway so that entire premise is bunk.


As for your other comments:

Those advancements were made in a different environment with different goals in mind. Nintendo is not a western developer, they're not going to structure their game the same way.
This is the animal crossing developers, they're not going to look at Halo and Call of Duty to determine how to make a video game.

They had one goal in mind, get people to play the videogame continously. People's handwringing as a vocal minority on neogaf is not gonna change that

The idea that games should follow the same set of rules and standards is how we get a homogenous AAA scene that doesnt fundamentally understand the reason people buy their videogames.

There's no point in sticking with tradition.



Counter Point: Those 2 decades of shooters have people who have a very large amount of complaints about games, and lots of those shooters get abandoned because of those complaints. This is why lots of people hate COD/ Battelfield Ect.

The point is you can serve different groups with very different models. Pro's and Con's guy.


I dont even understand why people would want loadouts and shit in the lobbies for Splatoon. This is a fast game, you get in and then get out, if you want to change something you exit the lobby and change it up, then get back in before the 4 hours are up and the game changes the modes available.

I never have trouble finding a match in splatoon and getting to it quickly because of how its built, thats a giant PRO.

Splatoon's infrastructure is shit in a vacuum. And its even funnier how much you ignore outside of that vacuum. I have shorter queues in Rainbow 6 siege than splatoon, a game that lets me queue with friends and play on the same team while finding groups for the opposing team, and randomizes the entire map selection.

Why do I want loadouts during matchmaking? Because swapping weapons while playing with a friend is a fucking gigantic waste of time.

1) Friend starts game
2) Join on friend
3) Wait 3-5 minutes for the game friend joined to end because it didnt slot you in to the lobby even though you joined as quickly as possible and their was space when you joined
4) play a game or 3 with X loadout
5) Want to change guns.
6) Back out of matchmaking completely and change gear
7) click join on friend
8) Proceed to wait 3-5 minutes once again just to get back in.

Horribly fucking obnoxious.

Splatoon's quality of life is garbage compared to what modern games are doing. Rainbow 6 Siege and Overwatch give you full use of all menus while matchmaking. In siege you can shop for gear, make a quick modification to scopes, adjust settings, fucking everything while waiting for a match. Amusingly you have to be super quick because matchmaking still only takes 30 seconds.

 

[NOLA_Gaffer]

Not unless you have 6 other people. And even then, it's through a separate App you have to download instead of just a feature of the game.

It's terrible.

Huh, interesting. When I played Salmon Run in Online Lounge the other day I was able to fill in the other two slots with randos, I assumed the same was true with Turf War.

 

[DrWong]

Huh, interesting. When I played Salmon Run in Online Lounge the other day I was able to fill in the other two slots with randos, I assumed the same was true with Turf War.

No it doesn"t work like that but you can still jump in a friend's turf game with the ingame friends list.

 

[Blackquill]

This thread man, it keeps on giving

 

[Chauzu]

This thread man, it keeps on giving

Yeah, last few pages has had some nice discussion, it's nice to see GAF showing their good sides once in a while.

 

[Renegade Frost]

I know, right! Splatoon isn't some niche indie game whose online player base starts small and quickly plummets. The game is a massive hit, selling millions already, and due to being a Nintendo game, will retain a sizeable player base for a very long time.

The game doesn't even put new players into an on-going matches to replace disconnected players (something which limited maps would help with). This is shown by the high number of 0pt "disconnected" players in each match. The uneven teams is yet another design issue for the game.

Map rotation has zero bearing on matchmaking speeds. You sit in a lobby until 8 players are matched, then the games loads up a selected map. Whatever map the backend selects for you to play has nothing to do with the initial search for 8 players.

I've heard mention that your selected weapon does come into consideration when the game is matchmaking. I have no idea if this is true or not. The game certain doesn't do any type of skill-based matchmaking, as the various levels of players shows. I have no idea if the game does connection-based matchmaking either. All I can see is that when I play in my region (Australia) I mostly play against Japanese players. Similar timezone, but hardly ideal ping.

Nobody ever said Splatoon was Titanfall bro

 

[phanphare]

Huh, interesting. When I played Salmon Run in Online Lounge the other day I was able to fill in the other two slots with randos, I assumed the same was true with Turf War.

it is, once you get everyone in you can open it up to randoms

 

[Renegade Frost]

that lovely screen you sit on while joining a friend because you can't pair up before turf war. Lots of fun downtime there and you cant even edit your weapon loadout...or do fucking anything. At least in splat one you could play the dumbass mini game on the gamepad

For league battle, not for turf war. And playing against my friends is pointless. Might as well just solo queue and sit on discord to chat.
Splatoon's infrastructure is shit in a vacuum. And its even funnier how much you ignore outside of that vacuum. I have shorter queues in Rainbow 6 siege than splatoon, a game that lets me queue with friends and play on the same team while finding groups for the opposing team, and randomizes the entire map selection.

Why do I want loadouts during matchmaking? Because swapping weapons while playing with a friend is a fucking gigantic waste of time.

1) Friend starts game
2) Join on friend
3) Wait 3-5 minutes for the game friend joined to end because it didnt slot you in to the lobby even though you joined as quickly as possible and their was space when you joined
4) play a game or 3 with X loadout
5) Want to change guns.
6) Back out of matchmaking completely and change gear
7) click join on friend
8) Proceed to wait 3-5 minutes once again just to get back in.

Horribly fucking obnoxious.

Splatoon's quality of life is garbage compared to what modern games are doing. Rainbow 6 Siege and Overwatch give you full use of all menus while matchmaking. In siege you can shop for gear, make a quick modification to scopes, adjust settings, fucking everything while waiting for a match. Amusingly you have to be super quick because matchmaking still only takes 30 seconds.

Sounds like you just need a quicker way to play with friends since you clearly arent talking to your buddy if they're getting themselves into matches without you.


Anyway, where's the dude who was griping about playing splatoon in Handheld mode? Using motion controls in that way is just like using motion controls on the wii U lol, Analog sticks for horizontal movement behind your takes too long (much faster with motion controls but not the most precise thing) , wish there was a quick turn option like in Resident evil 4, would be great for those moments when you get surrounded in enemy territory and want to blaze outta there

 

[imBask]

The merits or lackthereof when it comes to the 'bizarre design decisions', such as Splatoon 2 splitting friends between matches helping players with codependency issues.

Splatoon 2's design choice are great for people who have video games addiction, since the game actively doesn't want you to play

Thanks Reggie

 

[Crash331]

Huh, interesting. When I played Salmon Run in Online Lounge the other day I was able to fill in the other two slots with randos, I assumed the same was true with Turf War.

Nope, only works with Salmon Run.

Honestly, if they JUST added the ZL button prompt in turf wars to open up invites, I could live with a lot of my other gripes (loadouts, Pearl and Marina scenes, etc.)

Hosting a private match with a friend and having them be on my team and then opening it up with ZL and I'm 85% happy.

it is, once you get everyone in you can open it up to randoms

Lies

Sounds like you just need a quicker way to play with friends since you clearly arent talking to your buddy if they're getting themselves into matches without you.


Anyway, where's the dude who was griping about playing splatoon in Handheld mode? Using motion controls in that way is just like using motion controls on the wii U lol,

You don't have a choice. I've played with a friend in the same room. He watched me press A to join the queue and then he immediately hit join friend. He still wasn't paired in the initial lobby and he had to wait 3 mins for my first game to end.

 

[ShadowSoldier89]

Sounds like you just need a quicker way to play with friends since you clearly arent talking to your buddy if they're getting themselves into matches without you.

yea, I can totally click join faster than the icon turns green. And we are already on discord since you cant actually chat in splatoon 2.

 

[ACE 1991]

Not being able to consistently team up with friends is completely insane. How a multiplayer game in 2017 gets made like that is totally nuts.

 

[Renegade Frost]

Nope, only works with Salmon Run.

Honestly, if they JUST added the ZL button prompt in turf wars to open up invites, I could live with a lot of my other gripes (loadouts, Pearl and Marina scenes, etc.)

Hosting a private match with a friend and having them be on my team and then opening it up with ZL and I'm 85% happy.



Lies




You don't have a choice. I've played with a friend in the same room. He watched me press A to join the queue and then he immediately hit join friend. He still wasn't paired in the initial lobby and he had to wait 3 mins for my first game to end.

The pearl and marina scenes are so you know what's coming so you can adjust loadouts while you're in the plaza before you go into the lobby guy.

Splatoon on the Wii U seemed to have that covered anyway, did you play it?

Not being able to consistently team up with friends is completely insane. How a multiplayer game in 2017 gets made like that is totally nuts.

??? If you start a match with friends you're always able to play with or against them.

How is this not understood?

 

[Crash331]

yea, I can totally click join faster than the icon turns green. And we are already on discord since you cant actually chat in splatoon 2.

He's full of shit. See my post above. Me and a friend have been in the same room and he hit join as soon as he saw me queue up with his own eyes and it wasn't fast enough.

The pearl and marina scenes are so you know what's coming so you can adjust loadouts while you're in the plaza before you go into the lobby guy.

Splatoon on the Wii U seemed to have that covered anyway, did you play it?

This information is in the menu. I can look at it in 6 seconds. I don't need an unskippable cutscene to know what maps are active. It's only 2 fucking maps. I don't have to memorize the rosetta stone.

 

[Loota]

The map rotation system is probably not for everyone but at least for me it really hits the spot as a player who wants to learn and focus on single stages and the optimum loadouts for it at a time. Learning these stages cannot be done with the "you vs. empty stage" option the game gives to you, you need to have tens of matches against real opponents with varying weapon sets to start getting the hang of the stages and getting better at adapting. Having more stages in the rotation makes this process much harder and makes it hard to learn a certain weapon in a certain stage and optimizing your playstyle.

When going into Ranked, I appreciate the general swiftness of moving from a match to another which helps me to remain focused and allow easy adapting and learning, and when I'm not feeling my current build, I can drop out, spend as much time as I want planning my build and hop back playing instantly (as it's been for me so far). I get the people asking for a chance to switch weapons between matches but at least for me, the process of choosing the combination of the right weapon set and the supporting abilities is nowhere near fast.

Assuming they added the option to switch weapons in between matches, the time should be long enough for all players to be able to switch sets without feeling rushed and potentially left to play with a set they weren't able to optimize in that time. This would obviously prolong the time in between matches which wouldn't be the optimum solution to everybody either. People already hate the stage presentation thing which takes maybe 30 seconds, so the added waiting time between matches shouldn't be treated as trivial either.

I'm not overplaying the time needed for fully optimizing your sets eiher: you're probably soon going to have pages and pages of different equipment suited for different weapons and finding the combination of abilities (with each equipment having 4 ability slots to take into account) you're looking for isn't easy. Obviously, not all players care as much as the more serious players but the trade off for cutting the chance to switch is real.

As for letting people join as a team to solo Ranked, I'm strongly against that and I can't understand why anyone would want that when League exists. No point in going there alone anymore when coordinated teams have a significant upper hand, killing the only mode of effortless, quick and fair high level matches going on without worrying about friends or voice chat.

 

[Sephzilla]

I don't understand why Splatoon just doesn't use something similar to what Mario Kart 8 uses. The 2 map system is stupid