• Hey everyone, staff have documented a list of banned content and subject matter that we feel are not consistent with site values, and don't make sense to host discussion of on Famiboards. This list (and the relevant reasoning per item) is viewable here.
  • Do you have audio editing experience and want to help out with the Famiboards Discussion Club Podcast? If so, we're looking for help and would love to have you on the team! Just let us know in the Podcast Thread if you are interested!

Reviews Splatoon 3 | Review Thread

Great scores overall.

It is rather sad though, to see that Halo Infinite has a higher metacritic score than Splatoon 3. Despite Splatoon 3 having way more content, modes, weapons, and overall being way more fleshed out. That is a huge absurdity.

I mean, I have already put more hours into splatoon 3 than I have Halo Infinite's multiplayer, and it was a 12 hour demo with limited selection. But the pure variety of weapons and specials made it have way more content.
Raccoon said:
hahaha okay cool

the nice part of having played the splatfest and the entire game leaking beforehand is that I know they're wrong. usually we just have to take reviewers at their word because they're the only ones who get to actually play the games
Click to expand...
Yeah that is really nice.
 
RailWays said:
From a content standpoint I understand, since Splatoon 2 has its entire roadmap available right now. No doubt when Splatoon 3 gets a year worth of updates it'll have surpassed it though.
Click to expand...
But you don’t have splatfests, so it’s not a very good point since that’s a key component of these games. I can get behind not needing a new Splatoon or that it’s too similar as a valid opinion, but that seems like a disingenuous take to prove the broader point this reviewer has.
 
Lozjam said:
Great scores overall.

It is rather sad though, to see that Halo Infinite has a higher metacritic score than Splatoon 3. Despite Splatoon 3 having way more content, modes, weapons, and overall being way more fleshed out. That is a huge absurdity.

I mean, I have already put more hours into splatoon 3 than I have Halo Infinite's multiplayer, and it was a 12 hour demo with limited selection. But the pure variety of weapons and specials made it have way more content.

Yeah that is really nice.
Click to expand...

You have to bear in mind that Halo underwent a hugely bold campaign restructure, which, all in all, while not perfect, was hugely ambitious and a lot of fun.
 
Chaos Theory said:
You have to bear in mind that Halo underwent a hugely bold campaign restructure, which, all in all, while not perfect, was hugely ambitious and a lot of fun.
Click to expand...
Halo Infinite's Campaign is still largely unfinished, ends on a cliff hanger that they clearly thought they would "update it in", and has so much on the cutting room floor that the entire last half of the game feels empty. The open world bits were pretty fun, but repetitive. And the whole game lacks any visual or mechanical variety.

Also, it's currently lacking and cut features that were promised from the get go(and is still in the game).

I would put even Splatoon 2's milquetoast campaign over Halo Infinite's honestly. It's at least a cohesive story with mechanic and visual variety. And it has a lot of fun bosses.
 
Lozjam said:
Halo Infinite's Campaign is still largely unfinished, ends on a cliff hanger that they clearly thought they would "update it in", and has so much on the cutting room floor that the entire last half of the game feels empty. The open world bits were pretty fun, but repetitive. And the whole game lacks any visual or mechanical variety.

Also, it's currently lacking and cut features that were promised from the get go(and is still in the game).

I would put even Splatoon 2's milquetoast campaign over Halo Infinite's honestly. It's at least a cohesive story with mechanic and visual variety. And it has a lot of fun bosses.
Click to expand...

Yes, well, shows of ambition will win credit with professional reviewers over polished yet more of the same. And, largely unfinished? I played through Halo: Infinite's campaign and very much enjoyed the open world take on Halo. It could have been much more, but the campaign itself was a complete experience.

Context is important too, Halo: Infinite was somewhat of a success story having come of the back of the two worst Halo games ever made. Yet, while Splatoon 2 drew criticism for being more of the same, Nintendo went on to make a game that was...more of the same.

Ultimately, it seems the critics got it right.
 
0
Thunder84 said:
Cyberpunk completely demolished any good will that CDPR had built up and forced a widespread refund effort. Halo certainly has its problems, but it’s nowhere close to being the same level of failure.
Click to expand...

Yeah, 343 lost all good wil long before Infinite.
 
0
Thunder84 said:
Cyberpunk completely demolished any good will that CDPR had built up and forced a widespread refund effort. Halo certainly has its problems, but it’s nowhere close to being the same level of failure.
Click to expand...
Halo was supposed to be released in 2020, got delayed due to terrible graphics, got rushed out unfinished, game died out relatively quickly due to lack of content, has barely gotten any content since, and is now actively cancelling features. At least Cyberpunk has gotten some goodwill back with the last couple of updates, and has an expansion on the horizon. Meanwhile Halo popularity has just gotten worse and worse. This was the game that was supposed to sell the Series X. The game that actually did that was Forza Horizon 5.
 
Bixer said:
I think jumping into a game like this at launch is ultimately the clincher for me. Most of my Splatoon 2 play time came significantly after support for it had well and truly ended, so I think it’ll be really fun to actually be part of the zeitgeist somewhat this time and be exposed to new content as and when it arrives. Having announcements about it to look forward to in most Directs for the next 2 years too.
Click to expand...
yep. you're paying for two years of support
 
Magic-Man said:
Halo was supposed to be released in 2020, got delayed due to terrible graphics, got rushed out unfinished, game died out relatively quickly due to lack of content, has barely gotten any content since, and is now actively cancelling features. At least Cyberpunk has gotten some goodwill back with the last couple of updates, and has an expansion on the horizon. Meanwhile Halo popularity has just gotten worse and worse. This was the game that was supposed to sell the Series X. The game that actually did that was Forza Horizon 5.
Click to expand...
It's definitely on a decline and Cyberpunk is slowly pulling back, but the initial launch of Cyberpunk completely dwarfs anything Halo failed, or will fail, to do. It dropped a full 15 points in review scoring after launch, got lambasted for false advertising, and prompted every digital marketplace to offer refunds or pull it from the storefront entirely. It was completely unprecedented for the modern gaming sphere.

Again, I'm not saying Halo is particularly good, far from it. But the launch of Cyberpunk 2077 is in its own category of failure.
 
Bixer said:
If I’m to be totally honest, I’m one of those that thinks this does all seem a little too similar to 2. I didn’t need a revolution, but as more of a casual fan who doesn’t care much for it’s single player anyway, some of the QoL improvements are things I probably wouldn’t even notice. After the Splatfest it genuinely did cross my mind to just delete my Splatoon 2 save and kinda start that again instead, as it’s been long enough…BUT

I think jumping into a game like this at launch is ultimately the clincher for me. Most of my Splatoon 2 play time came significantly after support for it had well and truly ended, so I think it’ll be really fun to actually be part of the zeitgeist somewhat this time and be exposed to new content as and when it arrives. Having announcements about it to look forward to in most Directs for the next 2 years too.

And more Splatoon is more Splatoon. Without even owning the game I can say with relative certainty this will be my GotY.
Click to expand...

I can 100% confirm, being part of the playerbase while content updates are actively going on makes a world of difference
 
I am slowly having the splatoon itch.. so I might pick it up anyway. If I can persuade som friends to do so..

Though I have a dealbreaker question since I am too lazy to read all the reviews:
Can I team up with friends and actually stay on the same team? Or will the players be randomized between the teams like it was in Splatoon 2?
 
Mbolibombo said:
I am slowly having the splatoon itch.. so I might pick it up anyway. If I can persuade som friends to do so..

Though I have a dealbreaker question since I am too lazy to read all the reviews:
Can I team up with friends and actually stay on the same team? Or will the players be randomized between the teams like it was in Splatoon 2?
Click to expand...
You can, in every mode

Use Ctrl F 'Friends' here https://splatoon.nintendo.com/en/news/squid-research-lab-dives-deep-into-the-splatlands/
 
Maxrunner said:
As a Nintendo fan the last fews months have been a desert. This game proves that Nintendo mojo that they need new concepts for approving games is a fad. More of the same then. Meanwhile they could have made an arms 2 game with new gameplay.
Click to expand...
Yeah let's continue a mediocre dead series instead of an amazing one that's beloved by millions of people, because "new" > good
 
Maxrunner said:
As a Nintendo fan the last fews months have been a desert. This game proves that Nintendo mojo that they need new concepts for approving games is a fad. More of the same then. Meanwhile they could have made an arms 2 game with new gameplay.
Click to expand...
Nintendo fans when Nintendo doesn't make games of series they like:
 
Maxrunner said:
As a Nintendo fan the last fews months have been a desert. This game proves that Nintendo mojo that they need new concepts for approving games is a fad. More of the same then. Meanwhile they could have made an arms 2 game with new gameplay.
Click to expand...
very surprised this post ended with arms 2 of all things

very based, we have no choice but to stan
 
Maxrunner said:
As a Nintendo fan the last fews months have been a desert. This game proves that Nintendo mojo that they need new concepts for approving games is a fad. More of the same then. Meanwhile they could have made an arms 2 game with new gameplay.
Click to expand...
We’ve had 4 major releases over the past 3 months, 7 so far for 2022, with 3 more in the pipeline. And that’s not counting 3rd party games or any of the rumored stuff.

If the last few months have been a desert, then the previous few years have been a black hole. 2022 is the best the Switch has been in a long time.
 
Maxrunner said:
As a Nintendo fan the last fews months have been a desert. This game proves that Nintendo mojo that they need new concepts for approving games is a fad. More of the same then. Meanwhile they could have made an arms 2 game with new gameplay.
Click to expand...
You forgot the /s there amigo.
 
Maxrunner said:
As a Nintendo fan the last fews months have been a desert. This game proves that Nintendo mojo that they need new concepts for approving games is a fad. More of the same then. Meanwhile they could have made an arms 2 game with new gameplay.
Click to expand...
You cannot like everything. Be at peace with that.
 
PillFencer said:
Yeah let's continue a mediocre dead series instead of an amazing one that's beloved by millions of people, because "new" > good
Click to expand...
Whoa whoa whoa.

While I cannot fathom how Maxrunner can say that with a straight face, no need to stomp on the awesomeness of Arms.
 
Thunder84 said:
Cyberpunk completely demolished any good will that CDPR had built up and forced a widespread refund effort. Halo certainly has its problems, but it’s nowhere close to being the same level of failure.
Click to expand...
Halo Infinite has even die hard fans calling for 343 to be straight up dissolved and begging MS to give the series to anyone else.

Cyberpunk was a fuck up but people will still be totally in for Witcher 4 whenever that comes.
 
That VGC review is an odd one. I read it as a Splatoon fan and just see constant praise; Upgrades left, right and center, albeit not necessarily major ones. All that and it lands a near-mediocre 6/10.

Is it because the sequel doesn’t reinvent itself? Because it doesn’t really sound like the reviewer had an entirely average gaming experience. Not to mention it’s been 5 years, and the original title had plenty of content updates after its $60 release. Is a company not allowed to reset things with a fresh coat of paint after this long unless it’s “free”? This is just Nintendo’s version of a service game, and I hope to see a refinement in Splatoon 4 in another 4-5 years.

It’s only one review, but I’d have never guessed that score from the article sentiment that’s all. Not trying to shit on VGC, and I’m actually really happy about the broader reception - just an odd read
 
Last edited:
Chaos Theory said:
You have to bear in mind that Halo underwent a hugely bold campaign restructure, which, all in all, while not perfect, was hugely ambitious and a lot of fun.
Click to expand...
I don’t know if it’s all that ambitious. It’s just Far Cry with better controls.
 
0
Clix said:
Whoa whoa whoa.

While I cannot fathom how Maxrunner can say that with a straight face, no need to stomp on the awesomeness of Arms.
Click to expand...
Ok I admit I tend to exaggerate some things when reacting to these hot takes™️ ARMS is fun and one of Nintendo's best in terms of aesthetics
 
Seems like a really good score for this point in the games lifecycle considering how much will eventually be added to it.
 
Maxrunner said:
As a Nintendo fan the last fews months have been a desert. This game proves that Nintendo mojo that they need new concepts for approving games is a fad. More of the same then. Meanwhile they could have made an arms 2 game with new gameplay.
Click to expand...
While I don’t think either game should exist this clearly adresses the elephant in the room

I know there’s a lot of Splatoon fans here, but why act like another entry on the same console is welcome. Why accept Nintendo’s half measures in terms of implementing games as a service. This is pretty much the worst of both worlds, paying full price for games that get a few updates to then move to the next full priced sequel. The series would be so much more well received if it actually embraced the service model and was just a f2p constantly evolving multiplayer game. You would be paying for NSO and maybe you could sell the single player campaigns as standalone games as well, this has much more potential than simply releasing the games at full price

This is especially ironic considering that the announcement of the very first game was met with memes mocking Call of Duty players, but now it basically fell in the same trap besides that it’s not yearly. Other than that, you know why Splatoon’s reputation isn’t the greatest outside of its fanbase, even among Nintendo fans? Well on top of the soundtrack being annoying and the character designs being extremely punchable besides the jellyfish with the “fuck you” tshirt, the problem is that the series freaking killed every Nintendo multiplayer game except Smash and Mario Kart. Yes, Mario Sports games using the same model as Splatoon basically ruined them, every other multiplayer game now launches with very few content, gets some free updates down the line and then nothing. Splatoon brought a culture of mediocrity while being shielded from criticism purely by the goodwill of it having a unique concept back when it was announced in 2014

Sure, this last sentence is hyperbolic and none of this matters when the games keep selling well and people like it enough to consider it worth full price regardless but clearly Nintendo isn’t properly using the strengths of the GaaS model. The more they do that the more of their series, multiplayer especially, will just no longer be considered by some of their fans
 
Bixer said:
Maybe it’s ultimately semantics and doesn’t actually matter, but I think that VGC score sticks out more than it should because it’s been changed to fit a scale of 10.

They didn’t give it 6/10, they gave it 3 stars.

I know it technically means the same thing, but to me 6/10 sounds a bit worse than 3 stars out of 5. Not sure if it’s coincidental, but based on all of their recent reviews it appears as though they don’t ever offer half stars either, so they physically can’t give anything a ‘7/10’, it’s either a 6, an 8 or a 10.

Ultimately I think it’s an argument in favour of scores at the end of reviews being somewhat moot. If the language in the review suggests an overall positive experience, then that’s what we should take away from it.
Click to expand...

I assumed they used 1/2 stars. Fair point - this could be a ‘7/10’ which definitely is more positive feeling, but it’s not in their scale.
 
0
totofogo said:
I have... thoughts about most of the framing of this review but this part is actually pretty meh
Click to expand...

Uh... isn't there a day one update that adds those features to the base game? Meaning the reviewer was playing 1.0.0, which required online checks?
 
Yoshifan31 said:
While I don’t think either game should exist this clearly adresses the elephant in the room

I know there’s a lot of Splatoon fans here, but why act like another entry on the same console is welcome. Why accept Nintendo’s half measures in terms of implementing games as a service. This is pretty much the worst of both worlds, paying full price for games that get a few updates to then move to the next full priced sequel. The series would be so much more well received if it actually embraced the service model and was just a f2p constantly evolving multiplayer game. You would be paying for NSO and maybe you could sell the single player campaigns as standalone games as well, this has much more potential than simply releasing the games at full price

This is especially ironic considering that the announcement of the very first game was met with memes mocking Call of Duty players, but now it basically fell in the same trap besides that it’s not yearly. Other than that, you know why Splatoon’s reputation isn’t the greatest outside of its fanbase, even among Nintendo fans? Well on top of the soundtrack being annoying and the character designs being extremely punchable besides the jellyfish with the “fuck you” tshirt, the problem is that the series freaking killed every Nintendo multiplayer game except Smash and Mario Kart. Yes, Mario Sports games using the same model as Splatoon basically ruined them, every other multiplayer game now launches with very few content, gets some free updates down the line and then nothing. Splatoon brought a culture of mediocrity while being shielded from criticism purely by the goodwill of it having a unique concept back when it was announced in 2014

Sure, this last sentence is hyperbolic and none of this matters when the games keep selling well and people like it enough to consider it worth full price regardless but clearly Nintendo isn’t properly using the strengths of the GaaS model. The more they do that the more of their series, multiplayer especially, will just no longer be considered by some of their fans
Click to expand...

I don’t think I agree.
It’s important to keep a few points in mind:
-there is simply nothing else like Splatoon
-the gameplay and game feel of Splatoon is polished as hell. Can’t say the same about recent Mario Sports.
-Splatoon 3 has a full campaign, full suite of multiplayer modes, and co-op mode. It’s less impressive coming from a sequel that also did all of those things, but it’s impressive and a full-fledged game nontheless
-Splatoon music being annoying is subjective. I personally love it.
-the online modes, upgrades, and customization blow Mario Sports games out of the water. They blow a lot of online multiplayer games out of the water
-Splatoon 2 sold like 15 million copies. It’s not just a success, it’s a mega success. Splatoon 2 sold more than multiple Mario Tennis, Strikers, and Golf games combined


Taken at face value, Splatoon 2, and seemingly Splatoon 3, are fantastic, polished, full fledged games. Only with comparison to Splatoon 2 does it feel iterative.
 
Yoshifan31 said:
While I don’t think either game should exist this clearly adresses the elephant in the room

I know there’s a lot of Splatoon fans here, but why act like another entry on the same console is welcome. Why accept Nintendo’s half measures in terms of implementing games as a service. This is pretty much the worst of both worlds, paying full price for games that get a few updates to then move to the next full priced sequel. The series would be so much more well received if it actually embraced the service model and was just a f2p constantly evolving multiplayer game. You would be paying for NSO and maybe you could sell the single player campaigns as standalone games as well, this has much more potential than simply releasing the games at full price

This is especially ironic considering that the announcement of the very first game was met with memes mocking Call of Duty players, but now it basically fell in the same trap besides that it’s not yearly. Other than that, you know why Splatoon’s reputation isn’t the greatest outside of its fanbase, even among Nintendo fans? Well on top of the soundtrack being annoying and the character designs being extremely punchable besides the jellyfish with the “fuck you” tshirt, the problem is that the series freaking killed every Nintendo multiplayer game except Smash and Mario Kart. Yes, Mario Sports games using the same model as Splatoon basically ruined them, every other multiplayer game now launches with very few content, gets some free updates down the line and then nothing. Splatoon brought a culture of mediocrity while being shielded from criticism purely by the goodwill of it having a unique concept back when it was announced in 2014

Sure, this last sentence is hyperbolic and none of this matters when the games keep selling well and people like it enough to consider it worth full price regardless but clearly Nintendo isn’t properly using the strengths of the GaaS model. The more they do that the more of their series, multiplayer especially, will just no longer be considered by some of their fans
Click to expand...

It's $60 once every five years, come on
 
nintendo's shit rarely feels corporate, they give tons of freedom to their devs. That doesnt means it doesnt happens, look at the entire new super mario bros series lmao

On the other side i get that review's point. Splatoon 3 doesnt feels like a must have if you have splat 2 (just like oled isnt a must have if you have switch 2019) but i think it will get v cool over time : )
 
Maxrunner said:
As a Nintendo fan the last fews months have been a desert. This game proves that Nintendo mojo that they need new concepts for approving games is a fad. More of the same then. Meanwhile they could have made an arms 2 game with new gameplay.
Click to expand...

Is an open world Pokemon, a 3D Kirby, Switch Sports, new Xenoblade, Mario Soccer, and Fire Emblem musou (all games well received) not enough of an exclusive lineup for you?

What platform had higher quality or a wider variety of exclusives this year?
 
Last edited:
Yoshifan31 said:
While I don’t think either game should exist this clearly adresses the elephant in the room

I know there’s a lot of Splatoon fans here, but why act like another entry on the same console is welcome. Why accept Nintendo’s half measures in terms of implementing games as a service. This is pretty much the worst of both worlds, paying full price for games that get a few updates to then move to the next full priced sequel. The series would be so much more well received if it actually embraced the service model and was just a f2p constantly evolving multiplayer game. You would be paying for NSO and maybe you could sell the single player campaigns as standalone games as well, this has much more potential than simply releasing the games at full price

This is especially ironic considering that the announcement of the very first game was met with memes mocking Call of Duty players, but now it basically fell in the same trap besides that it’s not yearly. Other than that, you know why Splatoon’s reputation isn’t the greatest outside of its fanbase, even among Nintendo fans? Well on top of the soundtrack being annoying and the character designs being extremely punchable besides the jellyfish with the “fuck you” tshirt, the problem is that the series freaking killed every Nintendo multiplayer game except Smash and Mario Kart. Yes, Mario Sports games using the same model as Splatoon basically ruined them, every other multiplayer game now launches with very few content, gets some free updates down the line and then nothing. Splatoon brought a culture of mediocrity while being shielded from criticism purely by the goodwill of it having a unique concept back when it was announced in 2014

Sure, this last sentence is hyperbolic and none of this matters when the games keep selling well and people like it enough to consider it worth full price regardless but clearly Nintendo isn’t properly using the strengths of the GaaS model. The more they do that the more of their series, multiplayer especially, will just no longer be considered by some of their fans
Click to expand...
I'm going to ignore the last part about Splatoon killing other Nintendo multiplayer games because it's nonsense, but I'll respond to the GaaS portion. If this is sarcasm then my bad.

GaaS have to be monetized, which means Nintendo will have to withhold content in order to charge for it. When you factor that in with a paid single player experience, you could end up paying way more for the same content. Publishers don't do GaaS as a gift to consumers, they do it because many consumers will spend well over 60 dollars over the course of their time with the game. With Splatoon, you can spend your 60 dollars and get the vast majority of the package. Valorant for example has skin packs that cost over 100 dollars. Cosmetics are also a big part of Splatoon, as are weapons and stages, so the things Nintendo could charge for without ruining the experience is pretty small.

It's fine to want a FTP game if you intend to not spend any money on it ever, but I can assure you that many people have spent well over 120 dollars on FTP games so this isn't the 'worst of both worlds'. The worst part of FTP is microtransactions, Splatoon does not have these because you buy the game.
 
Yoshifan31 said:
While I don’t think either game should exist this clearly adresses the elephant in the room

I know there’s a lot of Splatoon fans here, but why act like another entry on the same console is welcome. Why accept Nintendo’s half measures in terms of implementing games as a service. This is pretty much the worst of both worlds, paying full price for games that get a few updates to then move to the next full priced sequel. The series would be so much more well received if it actually embraced the service model and was just a f2p constantly evolving multiplayer game. You would be paying for NSO and maybe you could sell the single player campaigns as standalone games as well, this has much more potential than simply releasing the games at full price

This is especially ironic considering that the announcement of the very first game was met with memes mocking Call of Duty players, but now it basically fell in the same trap besides that it’s not yearly. Other than that, you know why Splatoon’s reputation isn’t the greatest outside of its fanbase, even among Nintendo fans? Well on top of the soundtrack being annoying and the character designs being extremely punchable besides the jellyfish with the “fuck you” tshirt, the problem is that the series freaking killed every Nintendo multiplayer game except Smash and Mario Kart. Yes, Mario Sports games using the same model as Splatoon basically ruined them, every other multiplayer game now launches with very few content, gets some free updates down the line and then nothing. Splatoon brought a culture of mediocrity while being shielded from criticism purely by the goodwill of it having a unique concept back when it was announced in 2014

Sure, this last sentence is hyperbolic and none of this matters when the games keep selling well and people like it enough to consider it worth full price regardless but clearly Nintendo isn’t properly using the strengths of the GaaS model. The more they do that the more of their series, multiplayer especially, will just no longer be considered by some of their fans
Click to expand...
I guarantee you that Splatoon has very little bearing on Mario sports
 
bellydrum said:
It's $60 once every five years, come on
Click to expand...

You don't understand! Five years is basically one year when you're thinking in base five or something, which makes Splatoon the same as CoD! Also, it's destroyed the Nintendo multiplayer landscape. Nintendo's multiplayer experience is now limited to Smash Bros, two Mario Parties, Clubhouse Games, ARMS, Mario Kart, two Kirby games, Mario Bros U, Tropical Freeze, Mario 3D World, Animal Crossing, Pikmin 3, Tetris99, and some others that I forgot. Splatoon isn't especially well loved or successful outside its fanbase, but it is well loved and successful enough to force Nintendo to make Mario Sports games different from how I like them! Also the characters designs make me angry because they're terrible! Anyway I gotta pick up my life sized cutout of the fat Yoshi render from Mario RPG
 
Yoshifan31 said:
While I don’t think either game should exist this clearly adresses the elephant in the room

I know there’s a lot of Splatoon fans here, but why act like another entry on the same console is welcome. Why accept Nintendo’s half measures in terms of implementing games as a service. This is pretty much the worst of both worlds, paying full price for games that get a few updates to then move to the next full priced sequel. The series would be so much more well received if it actually embraced the service model and was just a f2p constantly evolving multiplayer game. You would be paying for NSO and maybe you could sell the single player campaigns as standalone games as well, this has much more potential than simply releasing the games at full price

This is especially ironic considering that the announcement of the very first game was met with memes mocking Call of Duty players, but now it basically fell in the same trap besides that it’s not yearly. Other than that, you know why Splatoon’s reputation isn’t the greatest outside of its fanbase, even among Nintendo fans? Well on top of the soundtrack being annoying and the character designs being extremely punchable besides the jellyfish with the “fuck you” tshirt, the problem is that the series freaking killed every Nintendo multiplayer game except Smash and Mario Kart. Yes, Mario Sports games using the same model as Splatoon basically ruined them, every other multiplayer game now launches with very few content, gets some free updates down the line and then nothing. Splatoon brought a culture of mediocrity while being shielded from criticism purely by the goodwill of it having a unique concept back when it was announced in 2014

Sure, this last sentence is hyperbolic and none of this matters when the games keep selling well and people like it enough to consider it worth full price regardless but clearly Nintendo isn’t properly using the strengths of the GaaS model. The more they do that the more of their series, multiplayer especially, will just no longer be considered by some of their fans
Click to expand...
Citations very much needed for all of these claims.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


Back
Top Bottom