By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Splatoon Metacritic Predictions

Wright said:
ClassicGamingWizzz said:


Be prepared to be quoted a lot


Nah. I dare anyone to tell me 67 is a bad score. Wish I'd score so high in certain subjects at the university :(


Well this is my metric:

90-100 = Amazing

80-89 = Great

70-79 = Good

60-69 = Decent

50-59 = Mediocre

0-49 = Bad

Splatoon is definitely more than just decent!



Around the Network
Einsam_Delphin said:


Well this is my metric:

90-100 = Amazing

80-89 = Great

70-79 = Good

60-69 = Decent

50-59 = Mediocre

0-49 = Bad

Splatoon is definitely more than just decent!


Well, even if I take my solid post and bound it by the rules of your metrics, I'd stand still. It's a 67 Decent game. Fun in short bursts, throwaway campaign (my guess), lack of content in vanilla game and stiff competition from other games like Mario Kart or Smash Bros that will make it struggle to keep relevant.



Skullwaker said:
SuperNova said:

I honestly have no idea about this one, it could go either way. I feel like some rewiewers are really going to love it due to rock solid controls, fun, innovative gameplay and nintendo polish, while others are going to be really hung up on the lack of voice chat and percieved lack of content at launch.

The only thing i have to say about the lack of content is that at least in EU/Japan it's the same price and probably about the same amout of content as Kirby and the rainbow curse. Kirby has 28 levels, Splatoon is rumored to have the same numer in it's single player campaign. Both have unlockable content via three Amiibo, and a multiplayermode of some kind. Kirby scored a 74. If anything is fair in this world at least that much should be a lock for splatoon.

I know it's not the best comparision, seeing that Splatoon is a shooter and Kirby a platformer but it's the only game in recent memory with comparable price/content I could think of. Of course it also doesn't really apply to US were the game is full price for some reason I don't get.

Now personally I hope Splatoon gets into mid 80s at least.

There's also the fact that Kirby didn't have an online mode, only local (Splatoon has both) and Splatoon allows for multiple control options while Kirby limits you to touch controls. At the very least, Splatoon should match Kirby but I suspect it will be higher than that.

Kirby and Toad are the same lenght. Toad is 81 because is fresh, polish and fun. Kirby doesnt have the Toad score because it is polish and fun too but you have to play with a stylus in a 480p screen insted of your tv,  and the game is not the first with the innovative concept (that was canvas curse, ), also is a 2D game, something percived as "cheap", Splatoon has none of those problems. If something it would match the Toad score just for the single player, and we know that the single player is where we are going to spend just the 5% of the time in this game, so... we´ll see.



Moyu said:

76

Reviewers are going to eat this game alive.

Hopefully I'm wrong and the game gets even lower scores

Have you even played it before?

This comment is hilarious to me. Based on your recent history though, it's unsurprising. 



Official Tokyo Mirage Sessions #FE Thread

                                      

Moyu said:

76

Reviewers are going to eat this game alive.

Hopefully I'm wrong and the game gets even lower scores


Your entire credibility is thrown out the window in the other thread. Not because of a prediction, because of your last sentence :-/



Around the Network
Wright said:
ClassicGamingWizzz said:


Be prepared to be quoted a lot


Nah. I dare anyone to tell me 67 is a bad score. Wish I'd score so high in certain subjects at the university :(

Is a terrible score for metacritic standars. 



Ka-pi96 said:
tbone51 said:
Pessimistic i know but 96!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! pls understand

Way too pessimistic! Why hate on the game with such a low score?


I would of went with a 99 but i didn't want to sound like a Fanboy



Samus Aran said:

So all you care about is how good the reviews are, not the actual game itself? Good to know.

I'm not the one who brought Driveclub in this thread, I don't go to the Sony Discussion to talk smack about that game.

Weather makes a racing game better now? It seems you don't have your priorities straight. They should've fixed the framerate instead.

You sure as hell don't mind talking smack about the game in here.

And what kind of a jump to conclusion is that? I already said that I don't care about Driveclub, how do you go from that to "I only care how good the reviews are"? I told you about my opinion on when the game should have released to get the best possible reviews, because that's what we're talking about: Games only being reviewed for the content that's being available at the time of the review.

And lol if you don't think that weather effects make a racing game better. How about you take that claim to the Forza fanbase, who has been requesting weather effects in the main game since forever? Or how about you go look up any of the articles that actually call Driveclubs weather one of its, if not the best feature? Again, don't talk smack if you're seriously just completely uninformed.



Ka-pi96 said:
Goodnightmoon said:
Wright said:


Nah. I dare anyone to tell me 67 is a bad score. Wish I'd score so high in certain subjects at the university :(

Is a terrible score for metacritic standars.

While true it does seem that metacritics standards are slowly lowering. There's actually a fair few good games down around those numbers these days.


I don t think so.



Wright said:

Well, even if I take my solid post and bound it by the rules of your metrics, I'd stand still. It's a 67 Decent game. Fun in short bursts, throwaway campaign (my guess), lack of content in vanilla game and stiff competition from other games like Mario Kart or Smash Bros that will make it struggle to keep relevant.


You may stand still good sir as we all have our opinions, however your reasoning is very flawed. It is fun in short burst, but if you're implying you can't spend hours at a time on it aswell then you're mistaken. Like Smash Bros. and Mario Kart, the game is highly addictive due to it's dynamic every changing battles making each one different from the last. Only good things have been said about the campaign, even comparisons to Galaxy. Sure most will probably only play it once and be done, but they still played it and it offered a different experience, so was not a waste putting it in. There is no lack of content either, it just wont all be there immediately, instead coming in free updates that help keep the community active. How do Mario Kart and Smash have any effect on the quality of this game other than making it easier to explain why it's so good?