They really need to scale damage to ink armor on a weapon by weapon basis. Same with the effect of object shredder. Too much of viability comes down to a weapon’s ability to take down ink armor, and that’s completely fixable. Instead of nerfing the special outright, making it so weapons like the 96 take down ink armor as effectively as an nzap does would allow for a more diverse meta without actually hurting any weapons in the current meta (as they will react to ink armor the same as they do now).
Agreed. What I really dislike is something like an nzap can shred armor as though it's not even there, but a CRB lobs a shot....breaks the armor....dies.....then tries to hit the armor wearer. Same with chargers. It affects different weapons differently. They should take some serious damage, armor or not, if they get hit with a blaster or charger. It should be the difference between getting ohko'd or not, but it shouldn't let them be invincible to slow firing weapons.
First off, we finally reach the 100 mark and wow I am impressed congrats
@SquidKid85
Second I already know what I am going to use
2 main 2 subs of sub up
1 main 2 subs of special charge up
And (hopefully) 3 subs of swim speed
Sub up increase the durability of walls so it is one of the few times it is useful, plus special charge up will compensate for the lackluster coverage of the .96 gal
EDIT: Also due to the sucess of the switch they are going to support it for 7 to 10 year instead of the usual 6
sure, 3DS is 7. Wii was 7, why not? Though it's funny it's a grand statement. PS has had a 10 year support cycle for the past 20 years... :P
They announced paid online was coming before the Switch was even out, and both competitors also require a fee (which is higher), so I don't see how PR-wise this is going to be anything more than a few people complaining about how it's not worth it and then everybody moves on.
The average consumer is going to be unaware of that earlier announcement. Fine print and early announcements aren't things average consumers look at. It won't be a surprise to US. It will be a surprise to THEM. Plenty of people may have heard about PS and XB requiring subs and went Nintendo because it doesn't. PS4 and XB1 launched day 1 with the requirement. X360 already had the requirement last gen. It's been part of the XB ecosystem for well over a decade. Sony introduced it DAY 1. You buy your console, get it home, find out it needs + to play online....ok, it's a new console, new box.....didn't realize that was required, whatever.
That's different than "I bought this a year ago and have played online and now they're TAKING IT AWAY!" The PR angle is *VERY* different, and the internet is a thing. Imagine XBox 1 reverting to their original launch DRM system and suddenly next September it's $30 to unlock a used game. I'm telling you, that's not going to go down without noise come September. It's just not possible it can't. Taking away free service people have used for a year or more doesn't go unnoticed, even if it was known to those that follow the industry. Imagine the Facebook posts....
Not fair that the 96 Deco get's to keep it's Splash Walls while Slosher Deco gets lame old Sprinklers instead, but eh!
@Award
I really don't think whether you enforce paid online at the start middle or end of the gen makes a difference. The effect is the same eitherway, being that games you were able to play for free before are suddenly pay to play. Sony got away with locking the aforementioned online multiplayer games which are all free on PS3 behind a 3x more expensive paywall without consequence. That's no doubt why Nintendo is doing this to begin with, they have 2 examples that prove pay to play is free money they can get away with. Though even if there is a drop-off, Splatoon 2 should be around 7 million copies sold by September so there'll be plenty of players still.
Sony did it on launch day on a new console. New platform with zero backward compatibility. PS3 still plays those PS3 games free. PS4 never played games online free. That's the point. If PS4 had free online for the first year and a half an then suddenly tossed the paywall on it, PR would have been BAD, and XBox wouldn't be hyping how great Minecraft on Switch is, they'd be leading the generation. Not because they have anything cheaper than Sony, but because, like the XBox blunder that handed Sony the lead at launch, the bad PR sticks in the public mindset, and people leave the company they perceived screwed them over. Even if the competitor is the same price, they didn't screw them with it.
The PR is just....not good on this one. Last July would have been ok PR wise. Next Sept.....that's not going to go well. It's not the fee, it's the sudden introduction. People don't like having their free things taken away.
Just like the toilet-paper and the pineapple fest, this is another controversial real-life topic, that once again will be met with complaints because the Splatoon fanbase is silly.
Pickles all the friggin' way, needless to say. If I had to choose between pickles or all the other typical ingredients (tomato, lettuce, cheese), I would take a pickle-only burger all day.
You know, I'm increasingly convinced EU splatfest is designed exclusively for you alone. :P
You are right, everybody moves on... to a different game on a system where online isn't paid. I mean, I will pay for at least a year, but if you think the Splatoon playerbase isn't going to take a hit with paid online, you are fooling yourself.
Nintendo is unlikely to support the Switch for that long. They kill the support for their systems in 4~5 years, rarely going over that mark.
They have a point, other than PC, there is no current platform with fee online. And PC has a very high barrier to entry that non enthusiasts won't go that route. (Paying $750-1k+ to save $20-60/yr doesn't really add up either.) But people that aren't die-hard online players won't bite. I'm paying for PS+ right now more for the club-membership sale pricing on games than for the online. But I won't need it every year once my backlog is plump enough.
I really feel like the Switch is going to go the way of the iPhone/mobile, but on a less rapid timeline. They can't ever go back to a dedicated console. They can't go back to a dedicated handheld. Nintendo will have to make a hybrid console forever, and I doubt they'll have to do more to the design than power upgrades. I don't mean FOREVER, but for a longer time than a traditional console life.
I think that's probably the plan. Maybe the 3D screen will return. 3DSwitch FTW! They need their gimmick....they need to find something unexpected. But this also will be the core form factor for some time until they find a way to reinvent it. Kimishima is more pure business, like Yamauchi was, though than Iwata the dreamer. If the Switch prints money he'll keep making Switches. BUT he's also grooming the role for Takahashi or Koizumi.....and those guys are dreamers.
Then again, I don't see some sort of max exedous back to Splatoon 1 when payed online becomes a thing. Hell, if Nintendo is greedy/smart, they'll shut down the Splatoon 1 servers about this time so this isn't even an option.
