Like it or not, Nintendo’s recent patching practices suggest the company is more in line with major publishers than fans want to admit.
http://www.nintendoworldreport.com/editorial/40249/nintendo-and-the-post-release-patch
I think most people agreed that it was highly unlikely that the upcoming Wii U Zelda game would actually release in 2015, as was originally announced by series producer Eiji Aonuma at The Game Awards in 2014. Still, when Aonuma recently revealed that the game would be delayed until 2016, it was a pretty big blow to this year’s Wii U line-up – we still don’t really know what’s coming after Yoshi’s Wooly World and Mario Maker this year. Slowly and surely, though, Nintendo fans, I among them, united under a familiar quote from Nintendo’s most iconic voice, Shigeru Miyamoto: “A delayed game is eventually good, but a rushed game is forever bad.”
That quote, when trotted out, isn’t typically meant to reassure Nintendo fans alone. It’s often used to differentiate Nintendo from other major publishers that seemingly push incomplete games out, only to release major patches down the road to fix and finalize them. Oh, you still can’t play the Master Chief Collection online? That’s why I like Nintendo – it would never do that.
Except, of course, that it would do that. And is doing that, actually.
In fact, two of Nintendo’s major first-party releases this year – and new IPs, to boot – have had or will have major post-launch patches that fundamentally change the out-of-the-box experience. Code Name: S.T.E.A.M., which released in March this year, was universally criticized for its laborious enemy turn times, which forced players to passively watch (or not watch, as the view was often obstructed by the level itself) as the AI enemy carefully repositioned its units around the map, which could take upwards of two minutes during bigger confrontations. It slowed the game to a crawl and was the major contributing factor to the game’s middling reviews.
During a Nintendo Direct last month, Nintendo announced that a major patch would be released in the near future to remedy the slow enemy movement by allowing players to fast forward (the speed of which depends on whether you’re playing on the OG 3DS or the *New* 3DS). A week later the patch was released, and just like that, the game’s most notorious issue was no more.
I guess there’s a glass half full/half empty debate to be had here. Was the patch diligently worked on and released by Nintendo in response to the unforeseen and sharp criticism, or was the ability to fast forward enemy movement willingly withheld in order to keep the game on its planned release schedule? Considering that Code Name: S.T.E.A.M. releases this month in Europe and Japan and the ability to fast forward will likely be available out of the box, I tend to see it from the half-empty view; Nintendo wanted the game out in North America this March, so concessions were made, knowing they could be fixed down the road.
Much more certain is Nintendo’s handling of Splatoon. Last week’s Nintendo Direct revealed that Nintendo would be “supporting” Splatoon throughout the summer with frequent updates and free additional content, including the ability to make a party with three of your friends and to create custom games. My immediate reaction was positive – free DLC! But thinking on it some more, and then discussing it on last week’s Nintendo News Report, it became clear to me; Nintendo isn’t planning to release additional content, it’s releasing the remaining content. Let’s be real here – in 2015, would we ever accept a competitive shooter being released without the ability to party with friends or host matches with custom settings? These are essential modes that won’t be available for months. Even Smash Bros. and Mario Kart 8, other marquee first-party titles, included these features from launch.
I’m a particularly big fan of EA’s NHL series, and last year’s iteration, NHL 15, was slammed for releasing without standard modes, including the ability to play online with teams completely controlled by human players. The modes were promised to be included in future patches – and were – but the damage had been done by that point. Bring up NHL 15, and you’ll mostly hear about what wasn’t there at the start, no matter what’s available to players now.
The announcement that expected modes would be patched in up to three months after Splatoon releases seemed to come and go without much criticism, which I understand to a point. Nintendo, while known for making questionable decisions on a business-level, typically gets the benefit of the doubt when it comes to the actual games. The Miyamoto quote helps support that. But, the handling of these two major first-party releases suggests that Nintendo isn’t above the practice of major post-launch patches, and it will be interesting to see if reviews of Splatoon are negatively impacted by the obvious omission of standard modes and, subsequently, if the game can rise above that when those modes are eventually available.
In the meantime, I’d like to suggest a revision to Miyamoto’s famous quote: “A delayed game is eventually good, but a rushed game is bad until the post-release patch(es).”
Just pointing out a typo in the headline: "Relase" vs. "Release"Oh my how ironic for an article about releasing unfinished products :P:
I was never a fan of patches, particularly day one patches. However, I now see them as necessary evils. Games have gotten more complex and more difficult to develop. I was a strong advocate of "make it right the first time," and I'd still like to see the effort so I only bemoan patches on a case by case basis.
That said, I can't really support what is being done with Splatoon. The game is very clearly being rushed. Nintendo has a history of offering free DLC, but these aren't merely nice bonuses. They're major features and substantial parts of the game still being worked on, and Nintendo is releasing the game anyway to fill a massive gap in its release schedule. Nintendo should be mildly commended for not charging extra (since, let's be honest here, most companies would), but I don't think Nintendo should get a pass.
Splatoon looks like a really great game to buy in a few months.
"A delayed game is eventually good, a bad game can be rushed to the market and passed off as good when it gets patched."
This is becoming a common theme in the industry. Nintendo was like the last holdout, and it's a shame that even Nintendo couldn't continue to fight the good fight in this regard, either by choice or the demands of the market.
But they weren't, during the Gamecube era Nintendo was rushing games out in order to meet dates for that system as well. Nintendo made it clear over a decade ago they will rush games out if their system is struggling and needs games. I agree it's sad much of the industry is releasing unfinished games that they just fix later but Nintendo releasing unfinished games to help fill their schedule isn't really a new thing.I don't know, man. You mentioned Wind Waker in your previous post, and called it "incomplete forever." Nintendo updated the game a year and a half ago, and if it considered the game incomplete, it could have easily inserted additional content outside of tweaks like the swift sail. I suppose it's possible that, given Wii U's obscene lack of first party titles at the time, Wind Waker HD was also rushed, giving that game the unique distinction of being rushed twice.
But they weren't, during the Gamecube era Nintendo was rushing games out in order to meet dates for that system as well. Nintendo made it clear over a decade ago they will rush games out if their system is struggling and needs games. I agree it's sad much of the industry is releasing unfinished games that they just fix later but Nintendo releasing unfinished games to help fill their schedule isn't really a new thing.I don't know, man. You mentioned Wind Waker in your previous post, and called it "incomplete forever." Nintendo updated the game a year and a half ago, and if it considered the game incomplete, it could have easily inserted additional content outside of tweaks like the swift sail. I suppose it's possible that, given Wii U's obscene lack of first party titles at the time, Wind Waker HD was also rushed, giving that game the unique distinction of being rushed twice.
Nintendo's been on record saying that the reason they never put the missing dungeons from Wind Waker back into the game is because those axed dungeons were adapted and moved into Twilight Princess.And I'm on record (in the post you quoted) saying "it could have easily inserted additional content" which is distinctly different from saying "it could have easily completed and inserted the removed content from the original version." Nintendo repurposing those dungeons is common knowledge among Zelda fans. That said, Nintendo could have created new dungeons for Wind Waker HD if it really wanted to correct the pacing issues in that way. However, in the same interview Eiji Aonuma admitted to using Wind Waker's removed dungeons in other games (http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2013-06-13-the-wind-wakers-missing-dungeons-were-reused-in-other-zelda-games), he admitted that not adding new dungeons was a conscious choice to stay true to the original version. The entire point of bringing this up is that Nintendo doesn't consider Wind Waker to be incomplete. Conversely, it does consider Splatoon to be incomplete, and is correcting that with a post-release patch.
The entire point of bringing this up is that Nintendo doesn't consider Wind Waker to be incomplete.If it wasn't complete and still got a 40/40 in famistsu, I wonder if it'd get a 42/40 if they actually completed it.
Which is something I doubt because the TP dungeons are actually good.But they weren't, during the Gamecube era Nintendo was rushing games out in order to meet dates for that system as well. Nintendo made it clear over a decade ago they will rush games out if their system is struggling and needs games. I agree it's sad much of the industry is releasing unfinished games that they just fix later but Nintendo releasing unfinished games to help fill their schedule isn't really a new thing.I don't know, man. You mentioned Wind Waker in your previous post, and called it "incomplete forever." Nintendo updated the game a year and a half ago, and if it considered the game incomplete, it could have easily inserted additional content outside of tweaks like the swift sail. I suppose it's possible that, given Wii U's obscene lack of first party titles at the time, Wind Waker HD was also rushed, giving that game the unique distinction of being rushed twice.
Nintendo's been on record saying that the reason they never put the missing dungeons from Wind Waker back into the game is because those dungeons were adapted and moved into Twilight Princess.
The ability to patch is fantastic. The way some developers choose to use that option to accelerate release dates by expecting consumers to pay in advance for unfinished content is not.