• Welcome to SquidBoards, the largest forum dedicated to Splatoon! Over 25,000 Splatoon fans from around the world have come to discuss this fantastic game with over 250,000 posts!

    Start on your journey in the Splatoon community!

  • Hey Guest, the Side Order expansion is now available!

    If you're playing the new DLC, please remember to keep your thread titles spoiler free, and use [spoiler] tags for any relevant spoilers in your posts.

Should games arbitrarily withhold content?

Zoot

Inkling Commander
Joined
May 4, 2015
Messages
336
Location
Surrey, UK
NNID
IveGotAMegaphone
Yahtzee of Zero Punctuation game review fame recently posted an opinion piece titled 'Should games arbitrarily withhold content?' where he talks about the ethics of game developers holding back parts of the game that their players have paid for. I'd recommend reading it, because he cites Splatoon as a clear example of content being kept unavailable for no real reason, with both the delayed release and time-restricted maps and game modes.

I'd like to hear your opinion. Ethically speaking, do you think it's okay for content you paid for to be locked by developers for a certain time? And in practice, do you think this practice has actually harmed your enjoyment of Splatoon? (Your answers to those two questions may be at odds with each other...)
 
Last edited:

Ictoan

Full Squid
Joined
Jun 30, 2015
Messages
35
NNID
Krrrrg
It's difficult for me to get a clear answer to whether content-locking is ethical in general, so I'm just going to focus on Splatoon right now. One of the ways this makes things easier is that I can list the locked content:

1) Amiibo-locked content
2) Unreleased maps and weapons
3) Map rotation
4) Unreleased game modes

More in depth:
1)
I don't know if Amiibo are quite relevant to what the article is talking about, as they're locked behind extra payment rather than time, but as it is still locked content, I find it useful to discuss.

Essentially, the Amiibo unlocks seem to be equivalent to on-disk DLC. In principle, I don't think this is a very good idea, but in this case, the unlockable content is so minor as to be insignificant to those who don't have Amiibo. The extra costumes are merely cosmetic, but the new ways to play story levels and the new minigames, while not very important, seem like the sort of thing that adds to the game in a non-trivial way. Essentially, these things can enrich the game, were developed beforehand, but are not allowed without spending extra money.

As such, while I think that hiding some of this content is of shaky ethics, the matter is so minor that I don't really care. However, I do have all the Amiibo, and do enjoy their benefits, so I would like to hear from someone who does not.

2)
As for this unreleased content, I think it's perfectly fine. With the large variety of weapons that the game starts with, withholding some isn't a problem. If the game started with only, say, shooter-type weapons, and we had to wait for chargers and rollers, I might be displeased, but we start with all kinds.

As for maps, I have essentially the same thoughts as the weapons. They've given us a nice variety, and very quickly have released more.

The main problem that the article seemed to have with this release strategy was its use as an incentive for people to play the game in shorter bursts, rather than play it all at once. I think the article is probably right about why the content is released why it is, but I disagree that this is a bad thing. The reason I disagree is, as I stated, we started with a full complement of weapons, and at least a good selection of maps. I don't mind Nintendo trying to get me to play the game over a longer period of time, as long as they don't do it by gradually lifting frustrating limitations, like the free-to-play games the article mentioned.

3)
As for map rotation, I don't think the purpose or effect of this is to cover up the number of maps, but rather to encourage people to think about what weapon set will work best for the pair of maps presented. I'm not sure if like this style of choosing maps better than a more traditional one, but I think this issue is more related to "what is good game design" than locking content.

4)
This relates to both the addition of new game modes (Splat Zones, Tower Control, etc.) and the addition of ranked matches. This is the most ethically dubious area to me. I realize this changed within a few days, but the game started with one multiplayer game mode, unranked Turf Wars, which I feel is actually a problem when, at the time of release, they had several other finished game modes. I realize what Nintendo is trying to do, letting people get used to one game mode before offering another, but this seems like something that consumers should be able to decide for themselves, and as it relates to a significant, non-trivial gameplay addition when the original offerings are sparse, it doesn't seem right to withhold it like this. Of course, the initial additions here were very quick.

Concluding stuff:
Some of Splatoon's content withholding seems to be somewhat problematic from an ethical standpoint. However, most of it is fine. I, for my own part, immensely enjoy the game, and have done so since launch, and I don't mind, and even in some cases appreciate how the content is rolling out. I think that the content withholding should be judged by the form that the game takes without extra content compared to the game's form with additional content, and from this aspect, the game does very well even from its start, and I don't think Splatoon significantly changes with the extra content, though it is certainly appreciated.
 

zmop

Inkling Cadet
Joined
Apr 26, 2015
Messages
184
NNID
zorgmop
Ah yes the ever slippery slope of this digital age…

Investors push developers, in this day and age, to get games out (in order to meet bottom lines,) even though they may or may not be ready. With the internet, developers can be lazy about releases and patch everything after the fact and in some cases, effectively screwing consumers out of the $64.95 title they just picked up ($59.99 with tax = the number I listed in my part of California if I pick up physical goods.) Development companies couldn’t do that in the past, and in fact if this practice was in place in the 80’s and 90’s, the gaming market wouldn’t be a billion dollar industry as no one would bother. They can band-aid fix everything now via the web and it’s so freaking stupid.

About withholding content, even though it’s clearly present in Splatoon, is shady to me. Nintendo wants to pretty much keep that carrot dangling in front of us long enough to mask the fact that the unfinished parts of the game (friend matchmaking, etc,) aren’t actually on the disc and probably weren’t even really thought about until closer to launch. A good portion of the guns they are slowly trickling down to us, should all have been released day one. But the mindset is, if they gave us all this content without the glimmer of hope for LAN and Spectating (I DO NOT believe Nintendo will ever implement either and hopefully I’m wrong but I doubt it,) we’d be done with Splatoon pretty damn fast, and Nintendo knows this.

Do not released half finished games. This game is getting a second ranked mode a month after launch. We have 2 unreleased maps left (sure more will come eventually) and a slew of weapons we will get trickled in until the friend functionality gets implemented (and perhaps after.) Eventually Nintendo will open up polls to us to ask what we want because they most likely have no idea what else to do with Splatoon long term. A tourney mode is probably half a year away if not longer and if at all. Lan Functionality and Spectating need to be the main things people put into Nintendo’s domes when these polls come up because it will be the only way Splatoon survives long term. I can see this game getting even staler over time and I am not saying this lightheartedly. I am insanely passionate about this game/ game’s survival however, I am just as cynical and realistic.


End note, gaming as a whole needs an evolution. VR & augmented reality are not it to me. Hopefully this mind-blowing advancement comes in my lifetime.
 

Power

Inkling Commander
Joined
May 31, 2015
Messages
440
Location
America
Well, I do not think it is quite "keeping me up at night" wrong that Nintendo withheld content like they did with Splatoon. However here is my $0.02:

-If you paid for the content in full, you should get it in full. If they wanted to withhold content then a possible fair situation would be to make us pay in increments
(Example: do not take the numbers seriously)
=====10 dollars for "full game" and then say 5$ for the extra modes and such until it adds up to full price. I believe that people and Nintendo would find this a hassle though

Anyway, aside from that ugly example I am not quite sure what Nintendo has to gain from withholding content if it is free and already on the game. More publicity? It seems that the withholding of content turned off many people which may have hurt Splatoon's sales a bit, (yes it still sold well) but who knows how the games popularity will change in the coming months.

The practice disgusts a group of people, (those who want their product in full) and it even bothers me despite the fact that I still enjoyed Splatoon since launch (although frustration and boredom with the game has started to settle in over the past week, but that's a different story.) however at least it has not gotten to levels where we pay for content that is already on the disc. The problem with what Nintendo did is that it appears as if it is slowly building up to that. A radical change would never work, but by slowly ingraining these actions to be the norm it would be easier to transition to one of those "pay for DLC on disc" types. That is where I draw the line. I feel in this way companies are starting to gain more control over the consumer with withheld content,

As a consumer I would not be comfortable with this form of control, but I guess it is one method companies use to profit. As consumers we must draw the line to how much we allow companies to control the product. (Although many who do not care will still buy, making it harder to actually have an influence) Hopefully this is not a precedent for worse practices to come by Nintendo.
 

Litagano Motscoud

Inkling Commander
Joined
May 4, 2015
Messages
421
Location
Temple, Georgia
NNID
Litagano
I don't really care from an ethical standpoint, but from a gameplay standpoint, it made the game stale earlier than it should.

I still enjoy the game, but part of me wishes they released the game with more content, even though I understand why they didn't.
 

missingno

Inkling Fleet Admiral
Joined
Jul 28, 2014
Messages
579
Location
Pennsylvania
Pronouns
he/him
NNID
missingno
Switch Friend Code
SW-6539-1393-3018
It's kind of dumb but as long as it'll be free in the end I'm not gonna bust pitchforks out.

The amiibos are bullshit though, I want Squid Beats but I'm not paying $35 just for that.
 

Twinkie

Full Squid
Joined
Jun 7, 2015
Messages
43
Location
Michigan
NNID
Twinkiman
Honestly I kinda like how content is released over time. Makes it easier to get into the game when it is released. But at the rate of what is being released now, I am pretty bored already. We should have gotten Tower Control 2 weeks ago.
 

NWPlayer123

Semi-Pro Squid
Joined
Apr 23, 2015
Messages
91
NNID
NWPlayer1234
The idea is to have more of the game prepared while they work on new content, that's what the whole August thing was about. They're working on a bunch of stuff that they'll push as another giant patch in August.
 

Ictoan

Full Squid
Joined
Jun 30, 2015
Messages
35
NNID
Krrrrg
The idea is to have more of the game prepared while they work on new content, that's what the whole August thing was about. They're working on a bunch of stuff that they'll push as another giant patch in August.
I think part of the debate is over whether or not the game needs this content to be complete, and as such, whether it's ethical for Nintendo to sell the game knowing that this large content patch won't come out for several months.
 
Joined
Oct 15, 2014
Messages
12
NNID
daguyontheladder
It's solely because of this reason why i'd consider splatoon as a secondary game. not something i'll invest hours into, but something i'll play when i'm bored.

here's what happens whenever i start this game:
so the title comes out, and i press ZR+ZL when prompted. marie and callie come out, and i spam the A button as if i'm playing legend of zelda. then i finally gain control of my inkling, and i press the stages button on the gamepad to see whats on rotation. i find that turf war has urchin underpass and port makeral. aww, those maps are my favorite, what i get in ranked? saltspray rig and the mall. great. at this point i must decide whether i should go play turfwar and just win every single match with a aerospray RG, or shut the game off. in most cases, i pick the ladder, and just go play something else. a minute in, and I've already have my dose of splatoon for the day.

i think call of duty hold my attention longer then this, which is something that should not be said. it's really sad too because splatoon is a fun game with a completely game changing concept, nothing else plays like this and thats a great thing. it's just that only 2 maps holds the experience back. it's as if nintendo was so scared that people would lose interest in the title, forgetting how many people still play super smash brothers melee after a complete decade of it's release. i hope this method gets stripped from the game in the future, i feel the game will be at it's greatest then.
 

Ictoan

Full Squid
Joined
Jun 30, 2015
Messages
35
NNID
Krrrrg
It's solely because of this reason why i'd consider splatoon as a secondary game. not something i'll invest hours into, but something i'll play when i'm bored.

here's what happens whenever i start this game:
so the title comes out, and i press ZR+ZL when prompted. marie and callie come out, and i spam the A button as if i'm playing legend of zelda. then i finally gain control of my inkling, and i press the stages button on the gamepad to see whats on rotation. i find that turf war has urchin underpass and port makeral. aww, those maps are my favorite, what i get in ranked? saltspray rig and the mall. great. at this point i must decide whether i should go play turfwar and just win every single match with a aerospray RG, or shut the game off. in most cases, i pick the ladder, and just go play something else. a minute in, and I've already have my dose of splatoon for the day.

i think call of duty hold my attention longer then this, which is something that should not be said. it's really sad too because splatoon is a fun game with a completely game changing concept, nothing else plays like this and thats a great thing. it's just that only 2 maps holds the experience back. it's as if nintendo was so scared that people would lose interest in the title, forgetting how many people still play super smash brothers melee after a complete decade of it's release. i hope this method gets stripped from the game in the future, i feel the game will be at it's greatest then.
The system has its disadvantages, but I don't mind it too much. A couple of changes that I think could alleviate this to a degree:
-More lobbies. I especially hope this happens because of new game modes, but this would also nearly guarantee that anyone's preferred maps are available somewhere.
-Private match map selection. I'm assuming this will happen, at least for 8-player private matches (It would be rather silly if it didn't). Of course, you need several other friends to implement this, but it'll be a nice option to have, especially for more competitive players.
 
Joined
Oct 15, 2014
Messages
12
NNID
daguyontheladder
The system has its disadvantages, but I don't mind it too much. A couple of changes that I think could alleviate this to a degree:
-More lobbies. I especially hope this happens because of new game modes, but this would also nearly guarantee that anyone's preferred maps are available somewhere.
-Private match map selection. I'm assuming this will happen, at least for 8-player private matches (It would be rather silly if it didn't). Of course, you need several other friends to implement this, but it'll be a nice option to have, especially for more competitive players.
for private matches, i would most likely go on squid boards to see if a lobby is up. this is something i'm actually looking forward to, constantly switching between maps and game types. i think this would be a good thing, too bad it would have to wait till august.
 

Litagano Motscoud

Inkling Commander
Joined
May 4, 2015
Messages
421
Location
Temple, Georgia
NNID
Litagano
I think part of the debate is over whether or not the game needs this content to be complete, and as such, whether it's ethical for Nintendo to sell the game knowing that this large content patch won't come out for several months.
Not sure why that's exactly an issue...if people don't feel like it's worth buying the game with the patch so far in the future, they could just not but it until the patch drops.
 

WaifuRaccoonBL

Inkling Fleet Admiral
Joined
Jul 22, 2013
Messages
601
Location
Wuhu Island
It should be of course be understood that all the content in Splatoon is finished. (I just skimmed the current discussion).

Now, it's important to start with Yahtzee's argument. Now it wasn't what I expected. Hiss argument is that having only 2 maps at a time doesn't benefit the play, but it actually does. It benefits the player because it prevents centralization. It prevents people just picking the best average weapon.

Now, as for the common thing involving the locked weapons and modes.

Honestly, I think it has been beneficial. I love seeing all the hype and speculation every time a new tumblr post comes. All the research and conversations have been fun as well.

We would have all have gotten through everyone in like a week after launch if it was all released on day one. We would've all settled into a specific weapon or mode as well. With them releasing a new weapon often, I actually feel more inclined to try them out. I might not have actually used a lot of these weapons if they were in the game in the first place.

There would also be nothing to be excited about after the launch. Except maybe splatfest.

I will concede though, that it is a lot harder to justify purchasing something that isn't complete.
 

DonkaFjord

Inkling Fleet Admiral
Joined
Aug 6, 2013
Messages
578
NNID
DonkaFjord
I think it was to keep the online community active and in the end was a smart way (especially if splatoon flopped) to keep a strong user base. A game like this without its online working would be destined to fail, so that was their main focus. I think as a community it was the right decision and they had good intentions and if splatoon 2 comes out I can see them having a lot more in the base/day 1 package.

Amiibos on the other hand... Well its a tricky balancing act between making those who don't have them feel like they aren't at a disadvantage or missing out on a lot and those who did buy them should feel like it is worth the cost. Until amiibos have a dedicated game or two (and that's even IF they get these games) then I can't really justify buying them. I impulse bought a few, but I am waiting for them to be more useful.

I think you need to keep in mind the purpose of why they locked away content (though there is evidence actual DLC things like maps will be patched in later after they exhaust the last two on disc ones, etc.) And the culture of Japan and the Dev team making it- the Animal crossing team focuses on trying to bring players back to the game over and over, Japan has this weird relationship with online focused games and intense western genres like shooters or sports games. It doesn't let the consumer have a lot of freedom, but it does improve the overall matchmaking experience. It isn't a black and white subject matter.
 

Ictoan

Full Squid
Joined
Jun 30, 2015
Messages
35
NNID
Krrrrg
Not sure why that's exactly an issue...if people don't feel like it's worth buying the game with the patch so far in the future, they could just not but it until the patch drops.
Again, I don't agree with the complaint against content, but I think I see why it exists, at least in general.

People may be comparing Splatoon to a work-in-progress game. An example I'll pick (because it looks interesting) is LEGO Worlds, which is an open world LEGO game where your character runs around a randomized map, encounters different biomes, animals, people, and stuctures, and can freely mold the world as they see fit. Now, that game is still missing a ton of features, which should be added later, most of them consisting of multiplayer and having something substantial to do besides just building random objects. However, LEGO Worlds is very clearly stated to be unfinished, and it's pretty much impossible to purchase it without realizing this.

Now, Splatoon on the other hand is implicitly marketed as a full, complete game, and I think some people are concerned that Nintendo is being slightly deceptive and releasing an unfinished game without making it explicit that there's essential stuff missing that won't come for a few months more.
 

Kikaioh

Full Squid
Joined
Nov 12, 2008
Messages
45
I'd disagree with Yahtzee. I've heard this sentiment expressed elsewhere, and I do think there were likely legitimate reasons for keeping all of the content unavailable. As an online game, Splatoon hinges on having 8 active players for any given match. So to keep the online community active, Nintendo may have felt it would be reasonable to time the unlocks for the game content slowly, so that over a long period of time they could give players a reason to keep coming back to the game every week, and as a result maintain a healthy number of players online for matchmaking. Nintendo probably had experience from MK8 and SSB to know that people are much likelier to return to online when new content is made available, and since unlike SSB and MK8 the need for a full set of 8 players is kind of required in Splatoon, that's probably why they felt it would be good to structure Splatoon's content release schedule in a way that encouraged everyone to come back every week. Personally, so long as the game content is made available for free I have no issue with it, since it makes sense and has led to fairly consistent matchmaking for me at least (not to mention, I'm even having a hard timing keeping up with the new content releases, and haven't even beaten the single-player yet).
 

Las7

Semi-Pro Squid
Joined
Jun 8, 2015
Messages
93
NNID
Las7man
How about a game like Bayonetta - you cannot play the hardest difficulties until you clear the game on the lower ones. How does that fit with the withholding of content. No one has ever had an issue with this.

In terms of Splatoon, my guess is Nintendo didn't expect that many people to buy it so quickly and wanted to make sure all the player base is available for their two main modes. Here is a quote from Iwata regarding the sales:

As some of you may have seen the TV commercials we have been airing recently, “Splatoon” is a brand-new title and not a title from an established series. It has a very unique and fantasy-like setting. This game, inspired by squid squirting out ink, is played by human-shaped characters with squid-like features shooting, instead of squirting, ink at each other, and the team that paints the widest area in its team color wins. Having received high recognition from our consumers for its novelty, this title’s sell-through sales reached 1 million units in less than a month from its release. We feel very grateful for this, since our view was not so optimistic prior to release, for it being a non-series title. "
Perhaps it would have been different if the management of Nintendo had more confidence in Splatoon, but this is a game which was made by a few younger staff and I'm guessing they didn't have the same resources that a new Zelda/Mario game would get.
 

CutestFish

Pro Squid
Joined
Jul 2, 2015
Messages
129
NNID
Ultimatumm
Part of it may have been a combination of rushed development and not wanting to overload the (largely young) players at launch. It's also a mechanic to keep people hooked. "Oh, new blaster? I gotta check it out." Definitely has pros and cons, I like the way they're doing it right now though. Recent things I don't like, however, include how bass ackwards they have the the system for what mode is in ranked.
 

Robotoboy20

Squid Scout
Joined
Jun 13, 2015
Messages
69
Location
Oklahoma
NNID
robotoboy30
Interestingly - I'd like to add some cultural insight to this topic! Japan really loves events, it's one of their more interesting cultural differences. That's not to say Japan likes events more than the west, but they kind of see it differently.

So, there are a lot of festivals held throughout each year in Japan. A lot... They have a lot more "important" or "spiritual" holidays because of how shinto buddhism works. A more modern comparison, which might be a bit hit or miss depending on your interest in anime: You ever watch kids anime? Things like Megaman Battle Network, Beyblades, heck Pokemon... There are "events" with big idol presenters... things change on a dime, and the characters never know what to expect, but they're forced to deal with these "events" or sudden rule changes as they come. It's common theme. The thing is Japan loves the whole element of surprise. They look forward to these "announcements" which why we get the Squid Sisters announcements when we boot up the game! It's a big "OOOOH What's next?"

So in my opinion it has more to do with attempting to please a certain audience. Splatoon has a huge Japanese audience, and it was made by Japanese developers, and even features a lot Japanese elements, such as the Squid Sisters songs, The way the generic Splatfest T looks, and the Giant Tanuki and Fox on top of inkopolis. It might not make sense to a western audience, but to it makes sense in a cultural context. Even Monsters Hunter has "event quests" that give you a dinky little souvenir for completing them.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top Bottom