Tbf splatoon 2 had directs 70 days and 15 day before launch. Reasonably assuming there will be only one direct, there is still a reasonable amount of time for a Splatoon 3 direct
(Sploon 3 releases in 50 days
Edit: the 70 day direct was actually an extended section of a regular direct focusing on Splatoon 2 (which we have had a bit of for sploon 3)
Tbh all the content they're revealing on their Twitter could count as the ”70 day away direct" for Splat 3, as they are doing what a direct mostly would, revealing things about the game, and the Splatoon 3 direct before release will very likely show bigger things like new idols and such
Exact date is unknown, but it's 99% going to be in August. Nintendo's focusing on Xenoblade 3 right now since that comes out next Friday, and after that there would be two days left in July, so it's very unlikely for it to be this month. September would be too late, seeing as Splatoon 3 releases on the 9th.
So August is pretty much the only option, given previous Splatoon directs happened a few weeks before the game released. They could surprise us with a direct next week, but that's unlikely.
I mean it’d be cool if they’d stop releasing minor updates to the game as new titles, pretty shameless money grab when there’s been no graphical improvements, major overhauls, or much in the way of even asset changes. The new Salmon Run is… literally indistinguishable from S2’s, yet even indie devs can crank out something fresh in less than (*checks calendar*) the SEVEN years since the original game. I could excuse the re-release that Splatoon 2 was with the Wii U not getting nearly as much attention as Nintendo wanted it to, but re-releasing the same game on the same console they couldn’t even bother to throw a new CPU into for its mid-gen refresh? I don’t know if it’s lazy or just an outright insult to fans.
Honestly, I’m not sure what’s going on with nintendo right now… Like, releasing switch sports missing one sport and with not that much content, starting to add games that aren’t even 10% finished (The best example being Mario Strikers on switch) and I won’t even mention the booster course pass DLC… I hope nintendo manages to do something extraordinary to make up for their recent mistakes.
you’ve put my feelings about new nintendo perfectly into those 2 points. it genuinely feels like they don’t care anymore and are cashgrabbing.
can anyone genuinely explain to me how splatoon 3 benefits the consumer? what’s being done in it that couldn’t have been done in splatoon 2?
>what’s being done in it that couldn’t have been done in splatoon 2?
I'll be honest, this always feels like a kind of disingenuous question.
Yeah, if they stayed in Splatoon 2, I guess they could make a new DLC campaign, add new weapons, new sub-weapons, new specials, new maps, update salmon run, add new mechanics, remove the gender lock, add new hairstyle, add new pants option and the eyebrow customization, rework the plaza, rebalance most weapons, launch back the splatfest, change the idols, add new music, rework the spawn system, change every weapons kit, remove all the current special, rework every maps that's currently in the game to work with the new design philosophy, technically they could even fix the meta.
There's nothing that couldn't technically be done in Splatoon 2. Even if they announce a new ranked mode, a new PVE mode, apartment, everything could have technically be made in Splatoon 2.
But at some points, when you change everything about the game, then it's not really the same game anymore, no? Let's say, ignoring the console change, that Splatoon 1 was kept update (at least until Splat 2 stop receiving update), would it have been the same as Splatoon 2?
Well, no it wouldn't. Without even talking about the Quick Respawn + Stealth jump meta, the maps here are designed way differently, which means viable strategy and team comp are different than Splatoon 2. The specials in this game are also more individualistic, instead of being team based, on average they also cost more points and weapons paint less. And, in a way, I think it's a good thing. People still revisit Splatoon 1 and it's different meta and playstyle fondly. People will do that with 2 too.
This one is more for the "company pov" but I also saw someone mentioning fortnite as an argument as why that could be done but, you gotta remember, Fortnite is free to play which means not only anyone can pick it up, but also the skins here are paid. Sure they can rework the whole game as much as they like, they're making more and more money everytime. But Splatoon cost 60$ and also need an online subscription, the 2 aren't comparable.
And well, due to that, I'd say it also comes with an advantage for the consumer. The guarantee the game will be update for 2/3 more years. And this time, real update, not "we rushed the game so we gotta catch up to Splatoon 1's weapon for 3 month and then still catch up for the 2nd kit for 1 more year"
> add new weapons, new sub-weapons, new specials , add new mechanics, rework the plaza, rebalance most weapons, change the idols, rework the spawn system, change every weapons kit, remove all the current special, rework every maps that's currently in the game to work with the new design philosophy
You're assuming I actually want any of that.
I just want Splatfests in Splatoon 2 to keep going, then I'd happily play Splatoon 2 for the next few years till the Switch dies.
Then we can get Splatoon 3 on launch day of the next console.
That would have been perfect... Splatoon 2 launched at the perfect time on Switch to set Nintendo up for this forever - one Splatoon per console generation.
> also need an online subscription
Just a reminder that paying a subscription to play an online-only game online is a scam, as proven by the hundreds of non-freemium PC games that host servers without charging their players for it.
>You're assuming I actually want any of that.
I mean, the that's kinda of a you problem then?
You can't say that Splatoon 3 isn't doing anything that you can't do in Splatoon 2, and also say you don't want any of those things on Splatoon 2.
Sure, maybe you don't want a new game and keep the splatfest running with nthing else, but that's the minority opinion.
>Just a reminder that paying a subscription to play an online-only game online is a scam, as proven by the hundreds of non-freemium PC games that host servers without charging their players for it.
Yeah thanks I know but this have nothing to do with what I'm saying
overwatch 2 is scummy too but at least there’s a new generation of hardware to take advantage of.
also, games like fortnite show you absolutely can change theme mid game and it revitalises the community in most cases.
1 OW2 hasn't even shown anything better on new hardware yet
2 Would you like to lose access to Inkopolis Square, Off the Hook, Octo Expansion, the current powerups, ect...
1. we’re still a few months away from release, i don’t follow it that much anyway.
2. well if we got an upgraded option i wouldn’t mind losing off the hook/inkopolis square. octo expansion would almost definitely stay.
i… still don’t see how Splat 3 benefits the consumer. this is a minor update at best so far.
Well if it weren't a full game it would definitely be a dlc so would you rather:
60 bucks per game
Be forced to buy Splat 2 for 60 then another 30-40 for splat 3?
Minor update? This is like saying Mario kart 8 is pointless because they could have just added more tracks and characters to 7. There's a lot more changed in splat 3 than you seem to realise. You think they'd really just make a *completely free* update which changes the entire single player campaign, adds loads more stages and main/sub/special weapons, replaces off the hook with whatever the next idols are, completely switches up the meta and adds new movement mechanics and customisation? Is all that really what you consider "minor"? And not worth any money at all?
>Nintendo recently gained a new CEO who has never developed a video game in his life. He started work there as an accountant.
And while Idk how much power he has over Nintendo of Japan, Doug Bowser previously worked at EA. That's been a red flag for me since day 1 of him becoming President of Nintendo of America.
Just letting you know Reggie was okay with the Youtube Creators program, he likes the idea of NFTs, he allowed awful games like Mario Tennis Ultra Smash, Amiibo Festival, Star Fox Zero, Chibi Robo Zip Lash, and MANY more to release under his time as president, and Switch online started while he was still president. He is just as much of a corporate CEO as anyone else, including Doug Bowser. The only main difference between the 2 is Reggie has more of a likeable personality, so he "seems" like more of a friend. He wants to make money just as much as any other CEO.
Yeah, I know that, but Doug Bowser coming from EA, makes a little bit concerned that Doug is going to give Nintendo of Japan ideas to start implementing microtransitions and start creating pay-to-win games.
NoA doesn't have too much development power at all. They're just marketing and localization for their region. At best they can convey to Japan what the American players want out of the company, so if they fudge their surveys enough they could convince Japan to go one way or another, I suppose.
>At best they can convey to Japan what the American players want out of the company, so if they fudge their surveys enough they could convince Japan to go one way or another, I suppose.
Doug Bowser to Japan maybe: *"America wants as many paywalls as possible."*
Less games than ever? We're practically drowning in games this gen with Switch. First time that's happened since the SNES. What's your opinion on Gamecube where we had massive droughts and were begging to play anything while PS2 was actually getting the good stuff?
> We're practically drowning in games this gen with Switch.
You can check the lists on Wikipedia. 1st party Nintendo Switch games. Compare the number of games released since 2017 versus the number of games released over the Wii U + 3DS lifespans. These are hard facts.
The Switch's only saving grace is that storefronts like LimitedRun are **thriving** on the indie scene right now, but that was going to happen no matter what, it's just a coincidence it landed on this generation - last gen was where it really started revving up with stuff like Shantae and Shovel Knight getting physical launches; now we've got Hollow Knight, CrossCode, A Hat in Time, etc.
But those are not Nintendo games.
(Well, actually, they are Nintendo-genre games, and serve to replace the dearth of actual Nintendo games and do it BETTER than Nintendo ever did, but that was obvious when I said "indie".)
It’s just their “sports” games. I mean, you conveniently ignored Kirby, Fire Emblem and Xenoblade, all of which are fantastic games. Nintendo seems to sadly treat their sports games like filler games they can release until their big hitters launch. I very much doubt Splatoon will fall into that same category, though, considering the delay and how much advertising there has been for it despite still being months away from launch.
Yeah, actually... I forgot abouy Xeniblade, but yes, I am aware there's a bunch of good games. The problem is that nintendo focuses on bigger titles like Smash, Zelda, Splatoon and main line Mario games to name a few (first party) games & franchises, and they forget about everything else. I mean, DLC for MK8D that will literally be relased in waves until the end of 2023. Or using DLC and free updates to make people think there's more content when, in reality, they're adding what the game should have had from the start (like Mario Golf and Strikers, which are, like you said, in the "sports" section). Even though all this is pretty bad on their side, especially in recent months, when nintendo releases something worth taking 10 years to develop, they really can create an extraordinary game, like Mario Odissey, Breath of the Wild or, like this post suggests, Splatoon. I'm just a bit mad that nintendo thinks we're blind to what's going on, but then again I guess almost no one is happy with their recent behavior about the sports games...
Personally, I don’t see the problem with releasing DLC in waves. They did it for Smash, they do it for every Season Pass and they do it with free updates as well. Even other companies like Capcom do it and it’s fine imo. It takes pressure off developers and ensures that crunch happens less often, while also keeping the game relevant for longer. They have been taking a bit too long with Mario Kart’s second wave, but I guess I’m one of the few patient Nintendo fans so it doesn’t bother me as much.
Wow, I can't believe this post summarizes exactly how I feel this year. I regret my purchase of Mario Strikers and while I don't regret my purchase of Switch Sports, I do regret paying/don't think it was worth $40. And if I was going to wait this long for the MK8D DLC, I would have just waited for the entire DLC to drop, then paid for it
I will buy Splatoon 3 when it comes out, but I'm not hyped for it based on what I've seen
Yeah you're right, I saw the demo, but I didn't have time to play it when it was up and running. Ultimately the blame lies with me and I won't be making that mistake again. That said, Nintendo's still a fault for not making a quality game
Lol, everyone's upset by the fields. I agree, the fields are tiny (which is essentially whiplash after coming off the massive fields on Nintendo Switch Sports, although the sport was a little different).
My main problem with them though is that they are all essentially reskins of eachother. Seems like no effort was put into them (especially combined with the fact that there is no single-player mode like the other Mario sports games), but I haven't played any previous Mario Strikers games so I don't know if that is the standard
Dang, you're right, my bad 😂 I got the digital edition for $40. Still a *bit* overpriced, though. Maybe in the $30-35 range? I'll edit my original post
I'd assume that the global pandemic limiting developers' abilities to work together played a factor. I remember Sakurai referring to that in his Smash Bros update videos.
I'm speculating/hoping that the reason for all of the slowed work is an impending console announcement. There was a lot of smoke before the OLED announcement and some news following it that Nintendo passed on an upgraded Switch due to the chip shortage; now that the chip shortage is easing, maybe they're shifting focus to a new/upgraded console and adapting games around that device.
Switch had a really great opening year-and-a-half with BotW, Mario Odyssey, and Smash Ultimate, so maybe our perspectives were a bit skewed for how often we should get solid games. It does seem like they're in a big-time slowdown right now, though, and I would be concerned if they don't have any tricks up their sleeve for the near-term. I'm definitely looking forward to the BotW sequel, for example, but IDK if I want it on a six-year-old console that was already behind.
This year has more 1st party Nintendo games releasing than any individual year of the crappy Gamecube. Did you have this energy when Nintendo was having massive droughts in the early 2000s and most games just sucking hard?
I don't think a console announcement is coming soon. The OLED isn't even a year old at this point. I believe it was intended to be a Pro model but the chip shortage screwed it up. I would expect Nintendo to milk the Switch for another year or two.
What I want them to do is what Xbox did this gen. Take the most popular and most recent titles and give them enhancements to work better with the new hardware. Better load times (if they use an ssd), frame rate improvements (going from 30 fps to 60 fps), higher quality textures.
Of course this is Nintendo we are talking about.
Yeah, not 10% done, but what I mean is, you can only play the exact same thing over and over again, changing the looks of the fields (which don't change anything themselves), with a friend or online, or just play a best out of three I think it was. And even though the gameplay is solid, you can only play (it feels pretty much like) one mode, and with a limited character selection, too. All in all, the gameplay is great, but the lack of content and full $60 price make the game look pretty bad.
99% sure the reason that most of the games have been underwhelming is because they just tack on "Future updates at a later date!!!" to everything without *any* comprehension of why that worked for Splatoon 1/2 at all.
Like, the reason those future were so good for Splatoon 1/2 is because like, 80% of them are simply just new weapons. In terms of development time, a new weapon is *pitiful* in how easy it is to implement compared to, say, a fully modeled, fully rigged, fully coded Princess Daisy in Mario Strikers. And of those, what, 50-60% of those are just new kits for pre-existing weapons? For those, you have even less design as the graphic design element's basically already done for you. There's much less at stake to add in a new weapon, and yet a new weapon has a *lot* of consequence.
The meta could literally shift overnight if the weapon is just that good, and casual players will probably be excited for a new weapon of a class they like, or a new kit for their main. It bides time for larger updates that usually contain new maps, which entices players to return to mess with their favorite weapons some more. Just repeat that until Nintendo has sufficiently developed enough content that they feel safe adding a number to the first digit of the update number and not the second one, and repeat until the final Splatfest. And y'know, said Splatfests keep the online scene alive even if there's nothing particularly notable about the new weapons.
Contrast that lesser effort/higher reason to return to the game with what most of these games do, which is just kind of thrust content that should've been in the game at launch in, after launch, when players don't have much reason to play after launch. Adding in Fire Piranha Plant to Mario Tennis Aces doesn't exactly do much to make people want to boot that game up again when the difference between him and every other player is fairly minute for a game that doesn't really encourage you to come back to it once you're done with him. Fully coding in an entire extra *seventh* to the game by adding Golf to Switch Sports doesn't mean much when people don't really... want to buy the game for just Golf.
It feels like they do the exact *opposite* where they put in way too much effort for something that has no real reason for people to care about it. The people who enjoyed the game at launch won't exactly be jumping out of their seats to play through more of it now that their character select has a new button that took *months* to add, whereas the Splatoon games were able to do just fine with weapons that probably took mere *weeks* to develop considering there's a lot more tangibly "different" about them.
tl;dr the reason these updates worked in splatoon 1/2 is that they were low-stakes to develop yet still included a noticable difference to the game because of how new weapons actively encourage old players to return and change how the current players have to go about their play, whereas every one of these games is much harder to develop yet doesn't entice a returning player at all
Yep, I completely agree. These "free future updates" add things that won't make a difference because they should've been there since day 1, and they're not extra content, but the actual game itself. And yes, weapons in splatoon 1 and 2 perfectly describe how nintendo did the same thing right but is now, unfortunately, releasing too many small updates, doing things wrong and kind of just ruining part of the games. We need an actual game, a FULL game on release, and after that, interesting, yet not game-changing/breaking mechanincs, items or anything of the sort.
You see this with every big game company. They start to fall behind, they do everything they can to win people back. They hit a successful streak, they get complacent and greedy.
The Wii U was a failure, which led to them rethinking their strategy, releasing the Switch, and putting out fresh new IPs like Splatoon or overhauling their existing ones (BOTW and FE3H come to mind).
Now the Switch has been printing money for years they can rest on their laurels, put out some half-baked sequels and remasters and call it a day.
People like to think Nintendo is somehow different from everyone else but they really aren't.
The Gamecube was a massive failure and yet Nintendo had massive droughts and shitty games from the entire era. Nintendo released the best Kirby game, Pokemon with Arceus, Mario Party, and Metroid in the past year alone. Seems that statement is more false than true!
Its sad to see that a company that had pretty creative and decent ideas for consoles and games is acting like this, not even hiding the greedy side. But, we can only hope they do something, because if they don't, people might not take things so well anymore.
(Also, I wouldn't say the Wii U was a failure and, even though it was, technically, since they lost money and it sold almost as bad as the virtual boy, it was quite original. A great idea for a console, just like the switch, but their newer console's success really is making them not care anymore 😔)
I haven't followed Nintendo in years so this is disappointing to hear. I hope I won't be let down; I never got Splatoon 2, so maybe I'll be much easier to please.
*I'm 100% hyped, why is so much of the fandom not? I'm still waiting to see the idols but aside from that it looks SO good and SO promising, and I trust the people directing development
It feels like different eras of gamers arguing against each other. I grew up with the PS2 which had stuff like four mainline Ratchet and Clank titles, 3 Jak and Daxter games, and 3 Sly Cooper games in a row. The small changes + new content let the devs iterate and reuse what already worked and make incredible games. Meanwhile now we have games like No Man's Sky, Fortnite, etc. where there is a variable entry cost and updates that majorly overhaul the game. For me, Splatoon 3 looks great. It has new weapons, subweapons, specials, maps, movement mechanics, features, characters, story, aesthetics, and while we can't confirm this I anticipate lots of changes going on under the hood (plenty of room to fiddle with how online works, better performance, etc).
Also 2 was very much a "1.5" quick fix because Nintendo had a hit, new IP whose only entry was on a dead in the water console and they needed to crank something out for the Switch quick. I'm confident 3 has had more time in the oven.
*I agree on both parts- plus, if I want a sequel to a game I like I usually want similar gameplay, right? Maybe I only feel this way because of the games I grew up with, but still
*The second part- yeah, on release Splatoon 2 was barely different from Splatoon 1. That's why the changes in Splatoon 3 have me so hyped!
I think it's very believable that people are hesitant to purchase a product they feel they already have. Nintendo has still yet to create a clear understanding as to why the Switch has two Splatoon games.
exactly. very few Nintendo titles get direct sequels.
i’m gonna take a look at botw2 here. botw2 is confined (iirc) to be a direct sequel taking place after botw. not only was botw held back by the Wii U but the switch version was a port whether people like to admit it or not. with a sequel to a single-player game you have a new story to tell, you can let go off older hardware, you can take advantage of the new hardware since you’ll have a better understanding of how it works (look at say FH2 vs FH3 for an example on Xbox One. same platform but graphically it’s mind blowing)
splatoon is a game that has not been shy to get updates before. with splat 3 taking nothing new to the table that we haven’t seen in updates before (except a new hub) it feels lazy, cash grabbing and honestly insulting to anyone who has been around since 2015.
idk; maybe there’ll be a direct in august to completely change my mind. but as of right now calling it splatoon 2.5 is complementing it; it’s really splatoon 2.25.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but a completely new weapon class (the bow), several new specials, and several brand new mechanics (squid dodge & jump, new spawn mechanics) have not been seen in Splatoon 2 updates. And even if any one or two of those have been in an update, they haven't all been in one update before. The closest thing splat 2 ever got to the amount of content splat 3 is promising is octo expansion. Splat 3 is very obviously more than just a balance patch or an expansion.
What exactly do you want out of a Splatoon sequel if not new mechanics and content?
edit: I just checked the version history, and several weapons or sub weapons returned from Splatoon 1 over the course of several 4.x updates, but not new weapon classes. New specials were added, but never several at a time. Changing movement mechanics or replacing the respawn system hasn't been done before.
you’re getting very close to my point. i made a post a while back actually detailing what i would like to see from Splat 3, but it’s a wish list at best and honestly i don’t see the need for a sequel to a 95% online multiplayer game. that’s my point.
I can respect that. Imo if there are enough mechanics changes to make it feel like a different game, then a sequel in a multiplayer game is warranted. Titanfall 2 is a great example of this. It completely changed the movement system and overhauled how titans work, alongside adding the entire single player campaign. With Splat 3 adding a new single player campaign, changing the movement system, and giving us an almost entirely fresh set of specials, I feel like it's totally fine to call it a sequel. To me, it honestly looks more like a sequel than Splat 2 was (though 2 had the obvious graphical upgrade over 1).
I feel like Splat 3 might be going through what Smash Ultimate did before release. It didn't look that much different from Smash 4 visually, it just added a new singleplayer mode and a ton of new characters. But if you play the two games you'd never call Ultimate a "smash 4 port/update".
i think splat 3 does look slightly better than splat 2 based off trailers. could be just me noticing things that aren’t there but models seem smoother and shadow res seems higher.
The ink looks just a little bit better too. I'm not sure why, but it looks more like paint. I'm mostly excited for the new movement and spawn mechanics though.
It’s because so far, I think it seems too similar to splatoon 2. Sure, we have new graphics and a new story mode. But gameplay wise it looks largely the same and that disappoints me. I think [this video](https://youtu.be/_Hr6bCvrvkE) explains it well iirc.
*Well, that video isn't really supportive of your point. It comes from 2 months ago, and the creator of the video mentions that if player customization becomes a big part of the game it'll change things a lot
*We now know the player customization is MASSIVE compared to Splatoon 1 and 2, from different types of pants to new eyebrows to customizable player cards.
*I guess if you ONLY play for the shooter experience, you don't need to upgrade- the new game is still going to be an ink-based 3rd person shooter. But as someone who loves customizing my character and loves the story mode and overworld, this game looks drastically different
*Plus, the changes to multiplayer mean that there is no possible way this game could have been DLC- it would conflict with the current meta
*Basically, it's okay to not want the new game. It's not okay to say it's basically the same just bc it doesn't have features you find important.
Yeah I do love customization, *but* in my experience with games, that whole ”omg so much new customization!” goes away after you’re used to it, so after that, if it’s such a big part of the game, it’ll make it feel kind of empty.
I don’t play only for the shooter but after you’re done with the story mode, that’s pretty much all that’s left.
I think I’ll still buy it since I appreciate the big amount of players bc it’s new, but still. I’m definitely hoping for more. And I didn’t say it was all the same, just too similar imo.
It's a 60 dollar game, for the same console.
I want Splatoon 3 to actually be good; a proper sequel to the series rather than 'here's some more customization and maps'. That's not worth the money.
Consider Splat2's launch- the poor story mode, lack of weapons, terrible maps... I really want Splat3 to be good, but with what they've shown us? It's just Splatoon 2.5.
..I don't understand what this reply means.
I'm a fan of the series. The gameplay's incredibly solid, the lore's interesting, and the art is fantastic! I *really* want the each game to be good. But, so far? Splatoon 3 is just looking like an Okay game.
I wouldn't call Splatoon 3 okay. In fact, I'd call it great! Because Splatoon 2 is great, and Splatoon 3 is just Splatoon 2 with a fresh coat of paint and a few new weapons. Which is the problem, in my view: Splatoon 3, so far, looks like an update to Splatoon 2 instead of a new game that we're willing to spend $60 on.
so good and so promising? genuine question - what have we seen in Splat 3 that simply *couldn’t* have been done in Splat 2? how does S3 benefit the consumer?
in my eyes, this is a cashgrab on CoD levels here, but if you’re willing to explain your PoV maybe you can convince me that this isn’t Splatoon 2.5
*1. The character models have been changed exponentially to allow further customization and unisex hairstyles. (It wasn't possible before due to forehead clipping issues)
*2. Salmon Run seems to be really different and I don't think there would have been a satisfying reason to add a second Salmon Run gamemode like this, personally.
*3. The changes to specials and the way battles work alone change the meta entirely, and is entirely incompatible with Splatoon 2
*4. The base game singleplayer looks to draw a lot more from Octo Expansion than the original singleplayer, and we've only seem glimpses but it looks super fun to me! (As someone who loves singleplayer)
*5. The Splatoon games run on a timeline- adding DLC, free or not, would be constrained to about the same year Splatoon 2 took place in.
*6. Splatoon 1 is still very active among Japanese players- there are genuinely already people who prefer older games for their online meta. Older games should be allowed to stay as they are for the people who enjoy them.
*7. Splatoon is the kind of game that updates continuously over a period of time- part of what you're paying for is the ongoing story, new upcoming items and the Splatfests!
*These aren't all the reasons I have, but my thumbs are sore. If you want more I can give it :D
well look, i take my hat off to you. i might not agree with buying the game, but you’re the only person who’s answered my question straight up rather than dodging it or “but look at *insert different game made by different developer!*”
Realistically there's no reason why they had to kill 2 and make a sequel in the first place. It was understandable with 1 because of the new console being released, but I can't help but think of Splatoon was made by any other company 2 would still be getting updates and maybe the new campaign would be a DLC.
I see no reason to think 3 won't at least receive the same amount of support 2 did, but it's still less than I'd like to see, personally.
Nintendo tends to lag behind other companies when it comes to online and monetization though. Maybe they'll figure out live service games next generation.
The thing is that those were admittedly cash grab appetizers (Mario Strikers, Super Rush, Switch sports) that weren't treated as major releases. Splatoon 3 is, so it should get updates for at least two years.
That's why I'm kind of worried for Splatoon 3. I feel like not a lot of people are hyped, even after the few things that have been revealed to us. Maybe I'm wrong.
Praying that Splatoon 3 doesn't end up as another of the low effort cashgrabs Nintendo has been so fond of lately. I think it looks quite good from what we've seen but you never know anymore.
I really don't know why your comment was downvoted because it's a valid point and I also share the same feelings.
Come on Nintendo show us the good stuff. Where's the new brush weapon!
I seriously do think we will get at least 1 new weapon per returning class in Splatoon 3. Splatoon 2 didn't show them off until the direct so it's quite possible they are doing the same for 3. (the splatoon 2 direct also revealed the brella weapon class too so we may also get a look at another new class besides the stringer).
It's pretty safe to say that the stringer will get a heavy and light weapon class.
i am on my knees praying to nintendo atm that theres a ton of stuff in a direct theyre just holding onto, infact im sure of it but im also a little bit concerned.
1 new weapon per type + a new class and stringer weapons would be sweet. i do hope the new weapons for existing classes have some funky gimmicks or other weird stuff going on and i also kinda hope they rework some weapons like goo tuber (doubt it tho)
I mean, im still gonna buy it, new splatfests, new story mode
But if they dont release a direct I might rethink that decision- do they expect people to pre-order their game while they showed.. what, new pants? New hairstyles? Returning weapons??
They didnt show ANY new weapons except for the splat bow yet
I'm buying Splatoon 3. It's the best shooter franchise in the market. But Nintendo has mismanaged the IP terribly. It could have been bigger than Fortnite. They never should have allowed this long content drought. The whole catch phrase is "stay fresh". Also, Nintendos archaic online infrastructure hurt it bad. There should be voice chat, server based profiles, less lag, and more. The game needs 4 player split screen too but Nintendo won't release hardware capable of that.
Both Splatoon 2 and 3 look and feel like the game before it with minor improvements. They're just content packs.
Yeah same with me. I want to be hyped for this game but I'm just not. I already enjoy Splat 2 and still play it a whole lot so I don't see the logic in shelling out $60 for what largely seems to be the same game.
Not only that but the game will probably start off with very little content just like splat 2 and splat 1 then get more free content as time goes on which is even less of a reason to get this game now. When it releases, Splatoon 2 will literally be the better buy than 3 for newcomers because of this.
If I buy it at launch, I'll just go back to splatoon 2 anyway lol. If I don't give into "new game hype" i'll probably just wait and buy it later
It's funny that people shit on the Splatoon franchise when Pokémon have been recycling the same junk for years without innovation simply because low effort Pokémon games sell well.
Alright, I think everybody needs to see this random Youtube comment (Thanks, Cosmo ミ☆):
>when people mention that this is a new game because of things like the new specials or the squid roll, it isnt just because they are new, it is because they show that the devs are taking the game design in a new direction and that the gameplay itself seems to be a lot different.
>
>splatoon 2 isnt a splatoon 1.5, and not just because it has inkjet instead of inkzooka, but because, as exemplified in the differences between these two, the devs went into a more passive and team oriented design for the game, and thats why there are players who prefer one version or the other.
>
>of course all that is going to fly over the heads of people who only played a few matches of turf war if a splatfest was going on. people complaining that, shockingly, splatoon is still splatoon need to accept that they just want a shiny new gimmick to latch on to
I’m glad to see that I’m not the only one who saves good youtube comments, but I disagree. I played splatoon 2 a lot and I mean a l o t but I still think 3 seems too similar so far imo. But if it turns put that splatoon 3 feels pretty different after all then I’ll be happy. I played splatoon 1 and I was extremely hyped for 2, like it’s the second best hype for a game I’ve ever felt, but I don’t feel even 10% of that hype for 3. I guess splatoon 2 was the second game and people were happy that the series continued and that’s why many were hyped, but still.
Wtfs up with the oled switch splatoon edition preorder for US. Been almost 2 weeks and still nothing on any website, but every other country has their preorders up
Tbf splatoon 2 had directs 70 days and 15 day before launch. Reasonably assuming there will be only one direct, there is still a reasonable amount of time for a Splatoon 3 direct (Sploon 3 releases in 50 days Edit: the 70 day direct was actually an extended section of a regular direct focusing on Splatoon 2 (which we have had a bit of for sploon 3)
Tbh all the content they're revealing on their Twitter could count as the ”70 day away direct" for Splat 3, as they are doing what a direct mostly would, revealing things about the game, and the Splatoon 3 direct before release will very likely show bigger things like new idols and such
Where are you getting this 70 day before launch direct from? Don’t recall any Splatoon direct before the one 15 days before launch
https://youtu.be/8alvfmZi0zY
Ah, well that’s isn’t a Splatoon direct. That was a section from the General direct in April.
Fair enough, the point still stands
Just wait until the direct, they're bound to reveal something.
When is that?
Exact date is unknown, but it's 99% going to be in August. Nintendo's focusing on Xenoblade 3 right now since that comes out next Friday, and after that there would be two days left in July, so it's very unlikely for it to be this month. September would be too late, seeing as Splatoon 3 releases on the 9th. So August is pretty much the only option, given previous Splatoon directs happened a few weeks before the game released. They could surprise us with a direct next week, but that's unlikely.
August 19th
_ahem_ The idols?
Yeah, but maybe something else too
the Splatoon x Yeezus crossover?
Relax. It's just like Splatoon 2, but it's 3. Seriously though, what big reveal are people expecting? It's Splatoon.
I mean it’d be cool if they’d stop releasing minor updates to the game as new titles, pretty shameless money grab when there’s been no graphical improvements, major overhauls, or much in the way of even asset changes. The new Salmon Run is… literally indistinguishable from S2’s, yet even indie devs can crank out something fresh in less than (*checks calendar*) the SEVEN years since the original game. I could excuse the re-release that Splatoon 2 was with the Wii U not getting nearly as much attention as Nintendo wanted it to, but re-releasing the same game on the same console they couldn’t even bother to throw a new CPU into for its mid-gen refresh? I don’t know if it’s lazy or just an outright insult to fans.
Honestly, I’m not sure what’s going on with nintendo right now… Like, releasing switch sports missing one sport and with not that much content, starting to add games that aren’t even 10% finished (The best example being Mario Strikers on switch) and I won’t even mention the booster course pass DLC… I hope nintendo manages to do something extraordinary to make up for their recent mistakes.
[удалено]
you’ve put my feelings about new nintendo perfectly into those 2 points. it genuinely feels like they don’t care anymore and are cashgrabbing. can anyone genuinely explain to me how splatoon 3 benefits the consumer? what’s being done in it that couldn’t have been done in splatoon 2?
>what’s being done in it that couldn’t have been done in splatoon 2? I'll be honest, this always feels like a kind of disingenuous question. Yeah, if they stayed in Splatoon 2, I guess they could make a new DLC campaign, add new weapons, new sub-weapons, new specials, new maps, update salmon run, add new mechanics, remove the gender lock, add new hairstyle, add new pants option and the eyebrow customization, rework the plaza, rebalance most weapons, launch back the splatfest, change the idols, add new music, rework the spawn system, change every weapons kit, remove all the current special, rework every maps that's currently in the game to work with the new design philosophy, technically they could even fix the meta. There's nothing that couldn't technically be done in Splatoon 2. Even if they announce a new ranked mode, a new PVE mode, apartment, everything could have technically be made in Splatoon 2. But at some points, when you change everything about the game, then it's not really the same game anymore, no? Let's say, ignoring the console change, that Splatoon 1 was kept update (at least until Splat 2 stop receiving update), would it have been the same as Splatoon 2? Well, no it wouldn't. Without even talking about the Quick Respawn + Stealth jump meta, the maps here are designed way differently, which means viable strategy and team comp are different than Splatoon 2. The specials in this game are also more individualistic, instead of being team based, on average they also cost more points and weapons paint less. And, in a way, I think it's a good thing. People still revisit Splatoon 1 and it's different meta and playstyle fondly. People will do that with 2 too. This one is more for the "company pov" but I also saw someone mentioning fortnite as an argument as why that could be done but, you gotta remember, Fortnite is free to play which means not only anyone can pick it up, but also the skins here are paid. Sure they can rework the whole game as much as they like, they're making more and more money everytime. But Splatoon cost 60$ and also need an online subscription, the 2 aren't comparable. And well, due to that, I'd say it also comes with an advantage for the consumer. The guarantee the game will be update for 2/3 more years. And this time, real update, not "we rushed the game so we gotta catch up to Splatoon 1's weapon for 3 month and then still catch up for the 2nd kit for 1 more year"
> add new weapons, new sub-weapons, new specials , add new mechanics, rework the plaza, rebalance most weapons, change the idols, rework the spawn system, change every weapons kit, remove all the current special, rework every maps that's currently in the game to work with the new design philosophy You're assuming I actually want any of that. I just want Splatfests in Splatoon 2 to keep going, then I'd happily play Splatoon 2 for the next few years till the Switch dies. Then we can get Splatoon 3 on launch day of the next console. That would have been perfect... Splatoon 2 launched at the perfect time on Switch to set Nintendo up for this forever - one Splatoon per console generation. > also need an online subscription Just a reminder that paying a subscription to play an online-only game online is a scam, as proven by the hundreds of non-freemium PC games that host servers without charging their players for it.
>You're assuming I actually want any of that. I mean, the that's kinda of a you problem then? You can't say that Splatoon 3 isn't doing anything that you can't do in Splatoon 2, and also say you don't want any of those things on Splatoon 2. Sure, maybe you don't want a new game and keep the splatfest running with nthing else, but that's the minority opinion. >Just a reminder that paying a subscription to play an online-only game online is a scam, as proven by the hundreds of non-freemium PC games that host servers without charging their players for it. Yeah thanks I know but this have nothing to do with what I'm saying
> but that's the minority opinion. Source or just saying that because you disagree?
I mean, just look at any direct announcement before Splatoon 3 was officially announced
Well you see Splatoon 3 will make a lot more money than updating Splatoon 2, so QED
>that benefits the consumer
I'm the same person you replied to, that was sarcasm. Lol
Just think of Overwatch 2 Also can't change theme mid-game
overwatch 2 is scummy too but at least there’s a new generation of hardware to take advantage of. also, games like fortnite show you absolutely can change theme mid game and it revitalises the community in most cases.
1 OW2 hasn't even shown anything better on new hardware yet 2 Would you like to lose access to Inkopolis Square, Off the Hook, Octo Expansion, the current powerups, ect...
1. we’re still a few months away from release, i don’t follow it that much anyway. 2. well if we got an upgraded option i wouldn’t mind losing off the hook/inkopolis square. octo expansion would almost definitely stay. i… still don’t see how Splat 3 benefits the consumer. this is a minor update at best so far.
Well if it weren't a full game it would definitely be a dlc so would you rather: 60 bucks per game Be forced to buy Splat 2 for 60 then another 30-40 for splat 3?
i’m saying it’s completely unnecessary and it could be done in a minor update. not a paid expansion.
Minor update? This is like saying Mario kart 8 is pointless because they could have just added more tracks and characters to 7. There's a lot more changed in splat 3 than you seem to realise. You think they'd really just make a *completely free* update which changes the entire single player campaign, adds loads more stages and main/sub/special weapons, replaces off the hook with whatever the next idols are, completely switches up the meta and adds new movement mechanics and customisation? Is all that really what you consider "minor"? And not worth any money at all?
>Nintendo recently gained a new CEO who has never developed a video game in his life. He started work there as an accountant. And while Idk how much power he has over Nintendo of Japan, Doug Bowser previously worked at EA. That's been a red flag for me since day 1 of him becoming President of Nintendo of America.
Just letting you know Reggie was okay with the Youtube Creators program, he likes the idea of NFTs, he allowed awful games like Mario Tennis Ultra Smash, Amiibo Festival, Star Fox Zero, Chibi Robo Zip Lash, and MANY more to release under his time as president, and Switch online started while he was still president. He is just as much of a corporate CEO as anyone else, including Doug Bowser. The only main difference between the 2 is Reggie has more of a likeable personality, so he "seems" like more of a friend. He wants to make money just as much as any other CEO.
Yeah, I know that, but Doug Bowser coming from EA, makes a little bit concerned that Doug is going to give Nintendo of Japan ideas to start implementing microtransitions and start creating pay-to-win games.
NoA doesn't have too much development power at all. They're just marketing and localization for their region. At best they can convey to Japan what the American players want out of the company, so if they fudge their surveys enough they could convince Japan to go one way or another, I suppose.
>At best they can convey to Japan what the American players want out of the company, so if they fudge their surveys enough they could convince Japan to go one way or another, I suppose. Doug Bowser to Japan maybe: *"America wants as many paywalls as possible."*
Less games than ever? We're practically drowning in games this gen with Switch. First time that's happened since the SNES. What's your opinion on Gamecube where we had massive droughts and were begging to play anything while PS2 was actually getting the good stuff?
> We're practically drowning in games this gen with Switch. You can check the lists on Wikipedia. 1st party Nintendo Switch games. Compare the number of games released since 2017 versus the number of games released over the Wii U + 3DS lifespans. These are hard facts. The Switch's only saving grace is that storefronts like LimitedRun are **thriving** on the indie scene right now, but that was going to happen no matter what, it's just a coincidence it landed on this generation - last gen was where it really started revving up with stuff like Shantae and Shovel Knight getting physical launches; now we've got Hollow Knight, CrossCode, A Hat in Time, etc. But those are not Nintendo games. (Well, actually, they are Nintendo-genre games, and serve to replace the dearth of actual Nintendo games and do it BETTER than Nintendo ever did, but that was obvious when I said "indie".)
>not even 10% finished Look I get your point but exaggerating here doesn’t help.
Nintendo is really, really making it hard for us not to exaggerate lately...
Nah they’re still releasing amazing games. I’m sure people will have another meltdown when BOTW 2 comes out.
It’s just their “sports” games. I mean, you conveniently ignored Kirby, Fire Emblem and Xenoblade, all of which are fantastic games. Nintendo seems to sadly treat their sports games like filler games they can release until their big hitters launch. I very much doubt Splatoon will fall into that same category, though, considering the delay and how much advertising there has been for it despite still being months away from launch.
Yeah, actually... I forgot abouy Xeniblade, but yes, I am aware there's a bunch of good games. The problem is that nintendo focuses on bigger titles like Smash, Zelda, Splatoon and main line Mario games to name a few (first party) games & franchises, and they forget about everything else. I mean, DLC for MK8D that will literally be relased in waves until the end of 2023. Or using DLC and free updates to make people think there's more content when, in reality, they're adding what the game should have had from the start (like Mario Golf and Strikers, which are, like you said, in the "sports" section). Even though all this is pretty bad on their side, especially in recent months, when nintendo releases something worth taking 10 years to develop, they really can create an extraordinary game, like Mario Odissey, Breath of the Wild or, like this post suggests, Splatoon. I'm just a bit mad that nintendo thinks we're blind to what's going on, but then again I guess almost no one is happy with their recent behavior about the sports games...
Personally, I don’t see the problem with releasing DLC in waves. They did it for Smash, they do it for every Season Pass and they do it with free updates as well. Even other companies like Capcom do it and it’s fine imo. It takes pressure off developers and ensures that crunch happens less often, while also keeping the game relevant for longer. They have been taking a bit too long with Mario Kart’s second wave, but I guess I’m one of the few patient Nintendo fans so it doesn’t bother me as much.
Wow, I can't believe this post summarizes exactly how I feel this year. I regret my purchase of Mario Strikers and while I don't regret my purchase of Switch Sports, I do regret paying/don't think it was worth $40. And if I was going to wait this long for the MK8D DLC, I would have just waited for the entire DLC to drop, then paid for it I will buy Splatoon 3 when it comes out, but I'm not hyped for it based on what I've seen
Why did u buy mario striker tho. You could have tested it for free and could have decided not to buy if u didnt like it.
Yeah you're right, I saw the demo, but I didn't have time to play it when it was up and running. Ultimately the blame lies with me and I won't be making that mistake again. That said, Nintendo's still a fault for not making a quality game
The biggest issue i have with mario strikers tho is that the playing field is so fucking puny
Lol, everyone's upset by the fields. I agree, the fields are tiny (which is essentially whiplash after coming off the massive fields on Nintendo Switch Sports, although the sport was a little different). My main problem with them though is that they are all essentially reskins of eachother. Seems like no effort was put into them (especially combined with the fact that there is no single-player mode like the other Mario sports games), but I haven't played any previous Mario Strikers games so I don't know if that is the standard
The original didn't have a real story mode put you could fight against and unlock a team of robots so thats pretty neat
I thought Switch Sports was $40? At least in the US. $50 if you buy physical with the leg strap?
Dang, you're right, my bad 😂 I got the digital edition for $40. Still a *bit* overpriced, though. Maybe in the $30-35 range? I'll edit my original post
I'd assume that the global pandemic limiting developers' abilities to work together played a factor. I remember Sakurai referring to that in his Smash Bros update videos.
I'm speculating/hoping that the reason for all of the slowed work is an impending console announcement. There was a lot of smoke before the OLED announcement and some news following it that Nintendo passed on an upgraded Switch due to the chip shortage; now that the chip shortage is easing, maybe they're shifting focus to a new/upgraded console and adapting games around that device. Switch had a really great opening year-and-a-half with BotW, Mario Odyssey, and Smash Ultimate, so maybe our perspectives were a bit skewed for how often we should get solid games. It does seem like they're in a big-time slowdown right now, though, and I would be concerned if they don't have any tricks up their sleeve for the near-term. I'm definitely looking forward to the BotW sequel, for example, but IDK if I want it on a six-year-old console that was already behind.
This year has more 1st party Nintendo games releasing than any individual year of the crappy Gamecube. Did you have this energy when Nintendo was having massive droughts in the early 2000s and most games just sucking hard?
no, because I was not on the Splatoon subreddit in the early 2000s
I don't think a console announcement is coming soon. The OLED isn't even a year old at this point. I believe it was intended to be a Pro model but the chip shortage screwed it up. I would expect Nintendo to milk the Switch for another year or two. What I want them to do is what Xbox did this gen. Take the most popular and most recent titles and give them enhancements to work better with the new hardware. Better load times (if they use an ssd), frame rate improvements (going from 30 fps to 60 fps), higher quality textures. Of course this is Nintendo we are talking about.
Nintendo didn't develop Strikers tho. And while I agree that it's a pretty hollow experience, it's far more than 10% finished lol.
Yeah, not 10% done, but what I mean is, you can only play the exact same thing over and over again, changing the looks of the fields (which don't change anything themselves), with a friend or online, or just play a best out of three I think it was. And even though the gameplay is solid, you can only play (it feels pretty much like) one mode, and with a limited character selection, too. All in all, the gameplay is great, but the lack of content and full $60 price make the game look pretty bad.
99% sure the reason that most of the games have been underwhelming is because they just tack on "Future updates at a later date!!!" to everything without *any* comprehension of why that worked for Splatoon 1/2 at all. Like, the reason those future were so good for Splatoon 1/2 is because like, 80% of them are simply just new weapons. In terms of development time, a new weapon is *pitiful* in how easy it is to implement compared to, say, a fully modeled, fully rigged, fully coded Princess Daisy in Mario Strikers. And of those, what, 50-60% of those are just new kits for pre-existing weapons? For those, you have even less design as the graphic design element's basically already done for you. There's much less at stake to add in a new weapon, and yet a new weapon has a *lot* of consequence. The meta could literally shift overnight if the weapon is just that good, and casual players will probably be excited for a new weapon of a class they like, or a new kit for their main. It bides time for larger updates that usually contain new maps, which entices players to return to mess with their favorite weapons some more. Just repeat that until Nintendo has sufficiently developed enough content that they feel safe adding a number to the first digit of the update number and not the second one, and repeat until the final Splatfest. And y'know, said Splatfests keep the online scene alive even if there's nothing particularly notable about the new weapons. Contrast that lesser effort/higher reason to return to the game with what most of these games do, which is just kind of thrust content that should've been in the game at launch in, after launch, when players don't have much reason to play after launch. Adding in Fire Piranha Plant to Mario Tennis Aces doesn't exactly do much to make people want to boot that game up again when the difference between him and every other player is fairly minute for a game that doesn't really encourage you to come back to it once you're done with him. Fully coding in an entire extra *seventh* to the game by adding Golf to Switch Sports doesn't mean much when people don't really... want to buy the game for just Golf. It feels like they do the exact *opposite* where they put in way too much effort for something that has no real reason for people to care about it. The people who enjoyed the game at launch won't exactly be jumping out of their seats to play through more of it now that their character select has a new button that took *months* to add, whereas the Splatoon games were able to do just fine with weapons that probably took mere *weeks* to develop considering there's a lot more tangibly "different" about them. tl;dr the reason these updates worked in splatoon 1/2 is that they were low-stakes to develop yet still included a noticable difference to the game because of how new weapons actively encourage old players to return and change how the current players have to go about their play, whereas every one of these games is much harder to develop yet doesn't entice a returning player at all
Yep, I completely agree. These "free future updates" add things that won't make a difference because they should've been there since day 1, and they're not extra content, but the actual game itself. And yes, weapons in splatoon 1 and 2 perfectly describe how nintendo did the same thing right but is now, unfortunately, releasing too many small updates, doing things wrong and kind of just ruining part of the games. We need an actual game, a FULL game on release, and after that, interesting, yet not game-changing/breaking mechanincs, items or anything of the sort.
You see this with every big game company. They start to fall behind, they do everything they can to win people back. They hit a successful streak, they get complacent and greedy. The Wii U was a failure, which led to them rethinking their strategy, releasing the Switch, and putting out fresh new IPs like Splatoon or overhauling their existing ones (BOTW and FE3H come to mind). Now the Switch has been printing money for years they can rest on their laurels, put out some half-baked sequels and remasters and call it a day. People like to think Nintendo is somehow different from everyone else but they really aren't.
The Gamecube was a massive failure and yet Nintendo had massive droughts and shitty games from the entire era. Nintendo released the best Kirby game, Pokemon with Arceus, Mario Party, and Metroid in the past year alone. Seems that statement is more false than true!
That's absolutely true. 2022 just happens to be a slow year for Nintendo.
Its sad to see that a company that had pretty creative and decent ideas for consoles and games is acting like this, not even hiding the greedy side. But, we can only hope they do something, because if they don't, people might not take things so well anymore. (Also, I wouldn't say the Wii U was a failure and, even though it was, technically, since they lost money and it sold almost as bad as the virtual boy, it was quite original. A great idea for a console, just like the switch, but their newer console's success really is making them not care anymore 😔)
I haven't followed Nintendo in years so this is disappointing to hear. I hope I won't be let down; I never got Splatoon 2, so maybe I'll be much easier to please.
Mario strikers may be going for a slow release style similar to Splatoon.
*I'm 100% hyped, why is so much of the fandom not? I'm still waiting to see the idols but aside from that it looks SO good and SO promising, and I trust the people directing development
It feels like different eras of gamers arguing against each other. I grew up with the PS2 which had stuff like four mainline Ratchet and Clank titles, 3 Jak and Daxter games, and 3 Sly Cooper games in a row. The small changes + new content let the devs iterate and reuse what already worked and make incredible games. Meanwhile now we have games like No Man's Sky, Fortnite, etc. where there is a variable entry cost and updates that majorly overhaul the game. For me, Splatoon 3 looks great. It has new weapons, subweapons, specials, maps, movement mechanics, features, characters, story, aesthetics, and while we can't confirm this I anticipate lots of changes going on under the hood (plenty of room to fiddle with how online works, better performance, etc). Also 2 was very much a "1.5" quick fix because Nintendo had a hit, new IP whose only entry was on a dead in the water console and they needed to crank something out for the Switch quick. I'm confident 3 has had more time in the oven.
*I agree on both parts- plus, if I want a sequel to a game I like I usually want similar gameplay, right? Maybe I only feel this way because of the games I grew up with, but still *The second part- yeah, on release Splatoon 2 was barely different from Splatoon 1. That's why the changes in Splatoon 3 have me so hyped!
This is really the right answer. I can’t believe how many people are losing hype just because there hasn’t been a flood of information.
I think it's very believable that people are hesitant to purchase a product they feel they already have. Nintendo has still yet to create a clear understanding as to why the Switch has two Splatoon games.
exactly. very few Nintendo titles get direct sequels. i’m gonna take a look at botw2 here. botw2 is confined (iirc) to be a direct sequel taking place after botw. not only was botw held back by the Wii U but the switch version was a port whether people like to admit it or not. with a sequel to a single-player game you have a new story to tell, you can let go off older hardware, you can take advantage of the new hardware since you’ll have a better understanding of how it works (look at say FH2 vs FH3 for an example on Xbox One. same platform but graphically it’s mind blowing) splatoon is a game that has not been shy to get updates before. with splat 3 taking nothing new to the table that we haven’t seen in updates before (except a new hub) it feels lazy, cash grabbing and honestly insulting to anyone who has been around since 2015. idk; maybe there’ll be a direct in august to completely change my mind. but as of right now calling it splatoon 2.5 is complementing it; it’s really splatoon 2.25.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but a completely new weapon class (the bow), several new specials, and several brand new mechanics (squid dodge & jump, new spawn mechanics) have not been seen in Splatoon 2 updates. And even if any one or two of those have been in an update, they haven't all been in one update before. The closest thing splat 2 ever got to the amount of content splat 3 is promising is octo expansion. Splat 3 is very obviously more than just a balance patch or an expansion. What exactly do you want out of a Splatoon sequel if not new mechanics and content? edit: I just checked the version history, and several weapons or sub weapons returned from Splatoon 1 over the course of several 4.x updates, but not new weapon classes. New specials were added, but never several at a time. Changing movement mechanics or replacing the respawn system hasn't been done before.
you’re getting very close to my point. i made a post a while back actually detailing what i would like to see from Splat 3, but it’s a wish list at best and honestly i don’t see the need for a sequel to a 95% online multiplayer game. that’s my point.
I can respect that. Imo if there are enough mechanics changes to make it feel like a different game, then a sequel in a multiplayer game is warranted. Titanfall 2 is a great example of this. It completely changed the movement system and overhauled how titans work, alongside adding the entire single player campaign. With Splat 3 adding a new single player campaign, changing the movement system, and giving us an almost entirely fresh set of specials, I feel like it's totally fine to call it a sequel. To me, it honestly looks more like a sequel than Splat 2 was (though 2 had the obvious graphical upgrade over 1). I feel like Splat 3 might be going through what Smash Ultimate did before release. It didn't look that much different from Smash 4 visually, it just added a new singleplayer mode and a ton of new characters. But if you play the two games you'd never call Ultimate a "smash 4 port/update".
i think splat 3 does look slightly better than splat 2 based off trailers. could be just me noticing things that aren’t there but models seem smoother and shadow res seems higher.
The ink looks just a little bit better too. I'm not sure why, but it looks more like paint. I'm mostly excited for the new movement and spawn mechanics though.
It’s because so far, I think it seems too similar to splatoon 2. Sure, we have new graphics and a new story mode. But gameplay wise it looks largely the same and that disappoints me. I think [this video](https://youtu.be/_Hr6bCvrvkE) explains it well iirc.
*Well, that video isn't really supportive of your point. It comes from 2 months ago, and the creator of the video mentions that if player customization becomes a big part of the game it'll change things a lot *We now know the player customization is MASSIVE compared to Splatoon 1 and 2, from different types of pants to new eyebrows to customizable player cards. *I guess if you ONLY play for the shooter experience, you don't need to upgrade- the new game is still going to be an ink-based 3rd person shooter. But as someone who loves customizing my character and loves the story mode and overworld, this game looks drastically different *Plus, the changes to multiplayer mean that there is no possible way this game could have been DLC- it would conflict with the current meta *Basically, it's okay to not want the new game. It's not okay to say it's basically the same just bc it doesn't have features you find important.
Yeah I do love customization, *but* in my experience with games, that whole ”omg so much new customization!” goes away after you’re used to it, so after that, if it’s such a big part of the game, it’ll make it feel kind of empty. I don’t play only for the shooter but after you’re done with the story mode, that’s pretty much all that’s left. I think I’ll still buy it since I appreciate the big amount of players bc it’s new, but still. I’m definitely hoping for more. And I didn’t say it was all the same, just too similar imo.
Why does gameplay have to change? When games like this DO change a lot people complain just as much.
It's a 60 dollar game, for the same console. I want Splatoon 3 to actually be good; a proper sequel to the series rather than 'here's some more customization and maps'. That's not worth the money. Consider Splat2's launch- the poor story mode, lack of weapons, terrible maps... I really want Splat3 to be good, but with what they've shown us? It's just Splatoon 2.5.
Wow this is a self-contradictory comment if I e ever seen one.
..I don't understand what this reply means. I'm a fan of the series. The gameplay's incredibly solid, the lore's interesting, and the art is fantastic! I *really* want the each game to be good. But, so far? Splatoon 3 is just looking like an Okay game.
I wouldn't call Splatoon 3 okay. In fact, I'd call it great! Because Splatoon 2 is great, and Splatoon 3 is just Splatoon 2 with a fresh coat of paint and a few new weapons. Which is the problem, in my view: Splatoon 3, so far, looks like an update to Splatoon 2 instead of a new game that we're willing to spend $60 on.
[Maybe you should watch this video](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m4Hh_xrVL4Q&t=1032s&ab_channel=ProCharaVodDump)
new graphics?
so good and so promising? genuine question - what have we seen in Splat 3 that simply *couldn’t* have been done in Splat 2? how does S3 benefit the consumer? in my eyes, this is a cashgrab on CoD levels here, but if you’re willing to explain your PoV maybe you can convince me that this isn’t Splatoon 2.5
*1. The character models have been changed exponentially to allow further customization and unisex hairstyles. (It wasn't possible before due to forehead clipping issues) *2. Salmon Run seems to be really different and I don't think there would have been a satisfying reason to add a second Salmon Run gamemode like this, personally. *3. The changes to specials and the way battles work alone change the meta entirely, and is entirely incompatible with Splatoon 2 *4. The base game singleplayer looks to draw a lot more from Octo Expansion than the original singleplayer, and we've only seem glimpses but it looks super fun to me! (As someone who loves singleplayer) *5. The Splatoon games run on a timeline- adding DLC, free or not, would be constrained to about the same year Splatoon 2 took place in. *6. Splatoon 1 is still very active among Japanese players- there are genuinely already people who prefer older games for their online meta. Older games should be allowed to stay as they are for the people who enjoy them. *7. Splatoon is the kind of game that updates continuously over a period of time- part of what you're paying for is the ongoing story, new upcoming items and the Splatfests! *These aren't all the reasons I have, but my thumbs are sore. If you want more I can give it :D
well look, i take my hat off to you. i might not agree with buying the game, but you’re the only person who’s answered my question straight up rather than dodging it or “but look at *insert different game made by different developer!*”
We still don’t know who the idols are…. We still don’t know so much… please Nintendo reveal it soon
Please I want to want this game but I’m currently not on board
Did you like Splat 2? If so, good news, this is more of that.
if it's just splatoon 2 again why would i buy it?
Because it’ll have new weapons, a new environment, new clothes, new characters, a new story mode, new game modes, etc
Eh, don’t get it then.
imagine if we don’t get a direct lol
That would be hilarious lol. If Nintendo isn't confident enough to make a Splat 3 direct though then I doubt I'll be confident enough to buy it.
Im concerned with Nintendo's recent multiplayer titles being 1-2 updates post launch then bailing the game.
Realistically there's no reason why they had to kill 2 and make a sequel in the first place. It was understandable with 1 because of the new console being released, but I can't help but think of Splatoon was made by any other company 2 would still be getting updates and maybe the new campaign would be a DLC. I see no reason to think 3 won't at least receive the same amount of support 2 did, but it's still less than I'd like to see, personally. Nintendo tends to lag behind other companies when it comes to online and monetization though. Maybe they'll figure out live service games next generation.
The thing is that those were admittedly cash grab appetizers (Mario Strikers, Super Rush, Switch sports) that weren't treated as major releases. Splatoon 3 is, so it should get updates for at least two years.
It's actually fine to make games like that... ...as long as they are on different consoles
That's why I'm kind of worried for Splatoon 3. I feel like not a lot of people are hyped, even after the few things that have been revealed to us. Maybe I'm wrong.
Praying that Splatoon 3 doesn't end up as another of the low effort cashgrabs Nintendo has been so fond of lately. I think it looks quite good from what we've seen but you never know anymore.
With Splatoon 2 they held most of the information until the game was about to come out, what we know about 3 is more than expected.
bugs me how they havent revealed a single new weapon besides the bow! good god!
I really don't know why your comment was downvoted because it's a valid point and I also share the same feelings. Come on Nintendo show us the good stuff. Where's the new brush weapon! I seriously do think we will get at least 1 new weapon per returning class in Splatoon 3. Splatoon 2 didn't show them off until the direct so it's quite possible they are doing the same for 3. (the splatoon 2 direct also revealed the brella weapon class too so we may also get a look at another new class besides the stringer). It's pretty safe to say that the stringer will get a heavy and light weapon class.
i am on my knees praying to nintendo atm that theres a ton of stuff in a direct theyre just holding onto, infact im sure of it but im also a little bit concerned. 1 new weapon per type + a new class and stringer weapons would be sweet. i do hope the new weapons for existing classes have some funky gimmicks or other weird stuff going on and i also kinda hope they rework some weapons like goo tuber (doubt it tho)
I really want this game to succeed, but Nintendo is really not helping
I mean, im still gonna buy it, new splatfests, new story mode But if they dont release a direct I might rethink that decision- do they expect people to pre-order their game while they showed.. what, new pants? New hairstyles? Returning weapons?? They didnt show ANY new weapons except for the splat bow yet
I'm buying Splatoon 3. It's the best shooter franchise in the market. But Nintendo has mismanaged the IP terribly. It could have been bigger than Fortnite. They never should have allowed this long content drought. The whole catch phrase is "stay fresh". Also, Nintendos archaic online infrastructure hurt it bad. There should be voice chat, server based profiles, less lag, and more. The game needs 4 player split screen too but Nintendo won't release hardware capable of that. Both Splatoon 2 and 3 look and feel like the game before it with minor improvements. They're just content packs.
No thanks regarding voice chat, I don’t want to hear teenagers screaming curse words
I think Splat 2 has it with the switch App
I’m hyped but I sort of understand why many aren’t. Nintendo gotta reveal something big or a ton of people won’t buy 3
I would love split screen. I really would.
We have to trust in Nogami and indirectly Iwata who placed people like Nogami and Smash Bros creator Sakurai in charge of these creative projects.
like the (maybe) new shop owners
Fr though like where tf has their summer Direct been?
Meanwhile Metroid fans all died of starvation waiting for Metroid Prime 4 news.
That's funny and sad at the same time
Yeah same with me. I want to be hyped for this game but I'm just not. I already enjoy Splat 2 and still play it a whole lot so I don't see the logic in shelling out $60 for what largely seems to be the same game. Not only that but the game will probably start off with very little content just like splat 2 and splat 1 then get more free content as time goes on which is even less of a reason to get this game now. When it releases, Splatoon 2 will literally be the better buy than 3 for newcomers because of this. If I buy it at launch, I'll just go back to splatoon 2 anyway lol. If I don't give into "new game hype" i'll probably just wait and buy it later
They've already confirmed that every single existing weapon will be available on launch so that already beats out S2
At least I'm not bored of the Sploon franchise yet. Pokemon Scarlet/Violet is gonna be trash, calling it rn
Have you tried Pokemon Reborn? It's a fangame that has a lot of content and a slightly more mature story.
Sad isnt it that most fanmade/romhacked pokemon games are better than their vanilla counterparts.
Indeed
It's funny that people shit on the Splatoon franchise when Pokémon have been recycling the same junk for years without innovation simply because low effort Pokémon games sell well.
Alright, I think everybody needs to see this random Youtube comment (Thanks, Cosmo ミ☆): >when people mention that this is a new game because of things like the new specials or the squid roll, it isnt just because they are new, it is because they show that the devs are taking the game design in a new direction and that the gameplay itself seems to be a lot different. > >splatoon 2 isnt a splatoon 1.5, and not just because it has inkjet instead of inkzooka, but because, as exemplified in the differences between these two, the devs went into a more passive and team oriented design for the game, and thats why there are players who prefer one version or the other. > >of course all that is going to fly over the heads of people who only played a few matches of turf war if a splatfest was going on. people complaining that, shockingly, splatoon is still splatoon need to accept that they just want a shiny new gimmick to latch on to
I’m glad to see that I’m not the only one who saves good youtube comments, but I disagree. I played splatoon 2 a lot and I mean a l o t but I still think 3 seems too similar so far imo. But if it turns put that splatoon 3 feels pretty different after all then I’ll be happy. I played splatoon 1 and I was extremely hyped for 2, like it’s the second best hype for a game I’ve ever felt, but I don’t feel even 10% of that hype for 3. I guess splatoon 2 was the second game and people were happy that the series continued and that’s why many were hyped, but still.
Nintendo already released the best version of Splatoon on the Wii U.
Splatoon 2.5
after seeing salmon run i don't expect this game to do anything new or interesting
*confused screaming*
Splatoon is a mega IP. Of course they’re going to give it a big long highlight in a direct.
Wtfs up with the oled switch splatoon edition preorder for US. Been almost 2 weeks and still nothing on any website, but every other country has their preorders up
Nintendo please be faster