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

Forums - Nintendo - So Paper Mario Color Splash is a huge flop

WiiU is near its end, the game is not what Nintendo fans wanted, it wasn't promoted enough.... I expected it could reach at least near 1M, but now I don't really think so. Still, I enjoyed the game more than I thought I would, since I really hate Sticker Star. It's actually way better.

And, well, I don't want to be THAT guy, but I'm sure that 99% of the people saying it's a low quality game hasn't even played it. I mean, I have a record of bashing the game since it was announced. I played it just because I read some reviews from reviewers I trust and agree with that the game is good. And I think it's actually decent. But it could be much more, that's for sure. It's really funny and charming, Sticker Star was souless. Combat system, even if it's a bit improved, it's still shitty though. This exactly same game with a similar TTYD combat system, could have sold way more and could have been critically acclaimed and loved by fans, imo. Nintendo's decision was simply stupid, that's for sure.



Around the Network

It deserved it for being shitty. Maybe next time they'll make a good Paper Mario



It's time that Nintendo started actually listening to its fanbases cries, and they can start with the switch. 

 

To to be fair tho, the Wii U is dead. Sales naturally declined for games, the few that it got, after its 3rd year. Games didn't even sell that well on it to begin with.



onionberry said:
we don't want this paper mario, we don't want that metroid. it's simple.

What else.



Lucas-Rio said:
Mar1217 said:

1) Putting your argumentation on a Metacritic score is funny.

2) So now 76 on Metacritic means it's a shitty game ?

On metacritics:

80+ = very good game, 85+ excellent

70+ = good  game

60+ very average

Under 60 = shit

 

it's not rocket science, but it's just telling the fact that it's far less reviewed than the previous games.

50+ is mediocre. Anything less than 50 is more accurate for what you described for under 60. Mediocre is having just about as many flaws as there are pros, which is essentially not particularly enjoyable save for the ultimate die hards

60+ is above average but not 'good' yet



Around the Network
Roar_Of_War said:
Lucas-Rio said:

On metacritics:

80+ = very good game, 85+ excellent

70+ = good  game

60+ very average

Under 60 = shit

 

it's not rocket science, but it's just telling the fact that it's far less reviewed than the previous games.

50+ is mediocre. Anything less than 50 is more accurate for what you described for under 60.

60+ is above average but not 'good' yet

As long as I like the game, it could have a 1/100. Metacritic is not a valid metric for me. I really don't trust, or agree with 95% of gaming media xD.



Hopefully this, and the failure of Metroid Prime Federation Force, convince Nintendo to actually listen to what fans want.



Mar1217 said:
CaptainExplosion2 said:
Hopefully this, and the failure of Metroid Prime Federation Force, convince Nintendo to actually listen to what fans want.

And if it bombs again even after listening to the fans ?

It won't if it's an ACTUAL Paper Mario game, by which I mean staying true to it's roots.



Mar1217 said:
yvanjean said:

I think the trend is already in place, Nintendo is trying to milk every franchise and doesn't care much about quality. 

Paper Mario: Color Splash - Metacritic 76
Kirby and the Rainbow Curse - Metacritc 73
Star Fox Zero - Metacritic 69
Mario Party 10 - Metacritic 66
Mario & Sonic at the Rio 2016 - Metacritic 65
Wii Party U - 65
Game & Wario - 61
SiNG PArty - Metacritc 60
Mario Tennis: Ultra Smash - Metacritic 58
Mario & Sonic at the Sochi 2014 - Metacritic 55
Pokemon Rumble U - Metacritic 49
Animal Crossing: Amiibo Festival - Metacritic 46
Devil's Third - Metacritic 43

Yeah ! Let's put some examples to show my point even though I decided to omit a lot of good titles which show that Nintendo cares about quality games ...

+ You could argue easily with some of these games ( SFZ,Kirby, PM CS ) that they put care and efforts with it.

And I'm not saying your wrong at all ( MP 10, Mario tennis Ultra Smash, M&S, etc ... ) but you're definitely overextending it bc you want this picture of Nintendo fit you view of things.

I only included Nintendo published game that have a low Metacritic. Game like Mario Tennis, Animal Crossing & Paper Mario .... all used to be 80's or better. 

Mario Tennis: Ultra Smash sold for full retail price and it just doesn't have the polish or quality standard that you are used to from Nintendo.

http://www.metacritic.com/search/all/paper%20mario/results
http://www.metacritic.com/search/all/mario%20tennis/results
http://www.metacritic.com/search/all/animal%20crossing/results

Worst version ever of the game were on 3DS and WiiU. 



yvanjean said:
Mar1217 said:

Yeah ! Let's put some examples to show my point even though I decided to omit a lot of good titles which show that Nintendo cares about quality games ...

+ You could argue easily with some of these games ( SFZ,Kirby, PM CS ) that they put care and efforts with it.

And I'm not saying your wrong at all ( MP 10, Mario tennis Ultra Smash, M&S, etc ... ) but you're definitely overextending it bc you want this picture of Nintendo fit you view of things.

I only included Nintendo published game that have a low Metacritic. Game like Mario Tennis, Animal Crossing & Paper Mario .... all used to be 80's or better. 

Mario Tennis: Ultra Smash sold for full retail price and it just doesn't have the polish or quality standard that you are used to from Nintendo.

http://www.metacritic.com/search/all/paper%20mario/results
http://www.metacritic.com/search/all/mario%20tennis/results
http://www.metacritic.com/search/all/animal%20crossing/results

Worst version ever of the game were on 3DS and WiiU. 

Nintendo has always had a few stinkers in their library, it was the last two years that were really bad but that may be due to the transition to Switch.