Nintendo

Team Dog Reigns Victorious In Splatoon’s First US Splatfest

If you’ve been wondering which of the two groups of pet fans would win out in the first ever Splatfest, Team Dog is the answer. Splatfest, a faction-like PvP event for the Wii U exclusive Splatoon, occurred for the first time in the US last weekend, pitting cat fans against dog fans. According to Squid Research Labs, Splatoon’s official development blog, “Team Dog’s numbers were too much to overcome.” There is still no news on when we can expect the next Splatfest.

62 comments

  1. Splatfest was just a popularity contest. Really, the fact that the amount of people on each team was the deciding factor was ridiculous. Cats got more wins so they should win. and if the Dog team had nearly twice as many people and Cats still got more wins, that just means the cats played better.

    1. Team Dog had to face Members of their own team in many matches and those mathes didn’t count for the tally at the end.

      What I’m trying to say is that when that happened, it wasted opportunities for Team Dog to actually get ahead in the battles. Because even though we did get points to rank up, those matches didn’t get points in the battles.

      I’m extremely sure if I had faced more cat teams, I would have contributed more points for the Dog team. I know this doesn’t mean much coming from a team Dog participant but I have to say it because a lot of participants from Team Cat are not aware of this at all, and flatly believe that Team Cat “steamrolled” Team Dog, when it was really decided by 1%

      I understand that it seems unfair but it really isn’t. It could have easily been a tie but it wasn’t, it wouldn’t work that way so it was given to the Cat Team. And I’m okay with that because the competition was extremely tight and fierce, it could have gone to either team.

      What people are forgetting is that the point of Splatfest was to have a friendly competition and have fun. Everyone still got super sea snails at the end.

      1. Uhh… That doesn’t make any sense.

        Say, there are 4 people on team cat and 12 on team dog online.

        At all times, Team Dog would have a valid match against Team Cat – 4 v 4. Those are the only matches that count towards Splatfest team points.

        The remaining 8 members of Team Dog would then have to face eachother for personal points rather than team points.

        Regardless of how many people there are per team, that does not hinder either team’s ability to win the most matches.

        No matter how we cut this, Splatfest will always be a popularity contest unless they remove that factor. The game takes measures to equalize each match, so we’ll always end with tight standings regarding wins (Hence the 49% & 51% for dog and cat). Given that, the win will theoretically go to the most popular team the majority of times simply because the game tries to be fair with match making.

        1. Exactly. I said the exact same thing pretty much, and because of this, popularity will almost always be more important than anything else during Splatfest. Why people are even trying to defend it, is really over my head.

          It’s so flawed, and it has a negative effect for each team. So it shouldn’t play a role in who wins. Like I said if they want to throw in some bonus snails just because you got on the more popular team, fine, but the team that actually won more should be rewarded more.

          If they also made it so the popular team just had to wait to get into a match with the other team, instead of allowing the same team to fight each other. Which I honestly didn’t think it would be that way, then popularity would not end up being that important.

          With the way it is now, like we both pointed out, it will be very hard for any team to win by a big enough margin to completely offset the popularity factor.

        2. No, you understand what I’m trying to say.

          Think about it this way if we went with what you are trying to say…if there are 12 dogs and 4 cats then that means only 4 dogs can battle those 4 cats, right?

          Then what about the other 8 Dogs? What will they do in the meantime? Wait 3 minutes to see IF they get a chance at those 4 cats? It’s not fair for those 8 dogs to have to wait so what do they do? Fight each other instead and gain a little experience while they wait.

          If it went another way and the 8 Dogs have to wait the entire 3 minutes, they’d lose interest and leave. Or worse, put those 8 dogs against 2-3 available cats in waiting. It would be Japan’s disastrous Splatfest instead now wouldn’t it? So yes, this is why Splatfest was delayed in the Americas to avoid this.

          Truth be told, I was never aware that popularity played a factor but I did get annoyed I had to play against my own Team many times. It was either that or “connection errors” at the very end of the match and even when the results were about to be revealed. And what happens when the connection drops?….an automatic loss for me and potentially for my team too.

          So yes, I stand by my argument that there were many lost opportunities for the team Dog to fully take the battles as well but I also applaud that Nintendo made sure Splatfest was accessible to everyone to play. That to me was very important and If given the choices if I rather wait 10-15 minutes to find a matchup against the opposing team or play against my own team in the meantime, I’d take the latter without a doubt.

          And no one really knew who was the more popular team until the very end so I’m also very glad Nintendo chose to keep that secret or else we would have had a complete mess. And I fully thought team cat was going to be more popular given to their internet reputation.

      2. However, you do make a valid point – Those matches against your own team are lost opportunities.

        If they were to remove the popularity factor, that would detract people from jumping on the bandwagon for most popular team and further even members out, causing less one-team matches.

        Really, it’s a broken system.

      3. Not everyone just plays games purely for fun, some people like to competitively play games and that is their way of having fun with them. As usual Nintendo always finds a way to cater more to the casual player.

        With the amount of people who played Splatfest, 2% is not a small number. And it was 51-49, it wasn’t just 1%. We won a good number of matches over the dog team, plain and simple. Maybe if only 100 people played Splatfest altogether, then 2% wouldn’t be that big of a number. That’s what the dog team keeps ignoring.

        And like you said yourself, popularity obviously has a negative effect for both sides of the team. Dogs end up playing nothing but Dog matches, and Cats even if they win more, have to win by a ridiculous margin, just to offset the popularity factor. So explain to me why popularity should take a part in who gets more snails? And even if the Dogs got paired more with the Cat team, who’s to say they could not have won even more matches? Although it could be both ways in that regard, if Dogs got paired with more Cats, they could’ve won more matches also. Point being, I’d rather have it that way, instead of popularity being a deciding factor in who wins.

        How about they don’t let the same team play against each other, why can’t they have the more popular team wait to get into a matches that actually have another team in it? So it can actually be based purely on skills alone, and what team actually won more matches, instead of having the more popular team waste time on matches that don’t even count towards Splatfest, and because of that the Cat team cannot accumulate that many more wins when Dog teams are stuck in matches playing each other.

        Popularity clearly screws everything up, and the fact they even allow the same teams to fight against each other that count for nothing.

        As almost every Splatfest will end up being a popularity contest. If you’ve checked the results of previous Splatfests, no team ever wins that much more percentage wise to offset popularity. As there are usually an equal amount of bad players and good players in these types of games. Popularity will always play too much of a role in Splatfest because of this, instead of the actual skills of each team.

        I can also bet nearly everyone who didn’t know much about Splatfest, assumed it was based on who won more matches. That’s what I thought, as I wanted to keep it a surprise and not spoil anything, only to be a little disappointed.

        And If I wanted to just have fun, I’d play regular matches. There’s already a place for that, so I don’t see why Splatfest is just a glorified regular mode, since there is clearly is no point to how many matches you win. They get everyone all hyped with this team vs. team stuff, and then it pretty much doesn’t even matter. People could literally just wait to vote, and see what team is more popular online, just to win Splatfest.

        It is dumb that the teams chosen, will always be more important than what team was actually better.

        1. How many shells did cats win who made it to King or Queen status? I got to Queen dog and earned 24 shells.

        2. Your assuming that all people who selected dog/cat were actually playing though. It was a holiday in the US so Im sure a good majority were out with friends/family the majority of the day. I played for a few hours and got up to Dog Champion, and played dogs quite a bit of the time. It really isnt fair for team dog to be wasting time against themselves when cats had the luxury to be going against the opposing team and racking up wins every time. Of course cats are going to edge out in that case, and splatfest actually gives the edge for wins overall to the less popular team bc they are always competing for wins.

        3. damn! i forgot that the splatfest was rescheduled… i was a cat too and A- rank, could have contributed to that tight fight. that’s a lot snails missed out on too, but that’s whatever.

      4. So the purpose of “Popularity” according to you is that if a dog played his best and the match resulted to be a dogs vs dogs match, his effort wouldn’t be rewarded, right? I think we can use that same logic to say that if a dog played like shit and it was a dogs vs dogs match, he’ll be forgiven of this mistakes. On the other hand, cats had to ALWAYS play their best because every match was the real deal, so the pressure was on the cats all along. IMO, that’s enough reason to not include Popularity and just count the dogs vs cats matches, plain a simple.

  2. I joined cats because that was the team my daughter joined…I felt a little but hurt that the number of people that picked dogs was the deciding factor…but in the end, what was the benifit to winning? I thought the night time levels and the party in the plaza was awesome

  3. Rock won in europe by far in popularity and they also won by a bit in scores… Glad I also chose rock :) got 10 seashells

  4. Basically cats won the matches but barely. Buy since most of us were forced to do alot of dog vs dog matches that counted for nothing its good we still won. The way they do the overall score made it fair.

  5. People saying it’s a popularity contest are somewhat right- but at the end that’s kind of the point right? Besides it’s not like that’s the only contributing factor, wins were 2/3 of it and popularity was only 1/3. When one team has waaaay more supporters the chance of losing goes up because it could also have waaaay more inexperienced players. That said Team Cat only won 2% more battles, while Dog had like 24% more supporters. Add it together and boom. If Cat could’ve won just a little bit more of the battles i’m sure they would’ve got it. I don’t get the rage. Both teams did good and it was fun win or lose imo. I’ll continue to play every single one even if I keep losing.

    1. No one is factoring in how many people played Splatfest. 2% might seem like a small number, but it isn’t when you consider how many people were playing throughout the entire event. Splatfest will never be won by huge margins when it comes to who won more matches, and based on every other Splatfest, that’s exactly what happens every time. Popularity is always more important.

      So it’s an obvious flaw in this whole Splatfest thing.

      They simply shouldn’t allow the same team to fight against each other, that’s the main problem. Cats can’t accumulate that many more wins even if we wanted to, because of this. And the same could be said for the other team, because they’re stuck in matches that do not count towards a win.

      1. As far as I know matches fought against your own team don’t count towards anything, so that means Team Cat just barely won more matches against Team Dog. Team Dog didn’t boost their numbers by fighting their own team. When you fight your own team you’re essentially wasting/killing time until opponents arrive, only victories over your opponents count towards the final Splatfest results.

    2. It wasn’t even 2%, it was 1% because there’s no such thing as a tie so the final scoring had to be imbalanced to 51%>49%.

      That’s how extremely close it was, but again there were many lost opportunities for the Dog team that could have turned it around. It is a popularity contest but I’m really disliking the salty attitude on many Team Cat participants claiming it was a “knockout” and a “landslide”.

      Jfc it was a close match, way closer than Europe and Japan’s Splatfest. I think it shows just how fierce America was in this game. Everyone joined their respective teams because they personally liked the choice right?

      Besides Nintendo never really said who was getting more popular votes during the thing. So I don’t really see why so many people are saying “OH NOW I HAVE TO JOIN THE POPULAR TEAM” when no one really knows?? Hell I thought Team Cat, Kings of the Internet would have been far more popular.

      If this would have been the other way around, Team Cat wouldn’t be complaining at all and instead call Team Dog salty so I really don’t see how scoring it different would have been any different in terms of reaction. People should just let it go and enjoy their prizes.

      1. Lol dude I thought Team Cat’s support percentage would’ve been like 70% or higher. Cats rule the internet and dogs rarely get any love. I was so shocked to see that it went that way.

  6. I don’t see why people would think cat team deserved to win. Team Dog had more players meaning more potential bad players who disconnect before or during a match or manage to get less than 400 points. If Team Cats was really superior, they would have won by a lot more.

    1. This could also be consider a vast assumption, to say just because the team had more players, it automatically meant they had more bad players. It really could go the other way also, and it ends up being completely dependent on what good players choose more.

      1. considered*

        Also, assuming more people would disconnect because of this? It really makes it seem like you people are more into making up excuses for this poorly implemented popularity system. Rather than acknowledging how it creates problems for both sides of each team.

        1. Well, my point is that it makes more room for loses because of that. I never said that it automatically meant that they had more bad players. The scores were really close. Its not like Team Dog automatically won because they had more players. They just decided to give 1/3 of the points to popularity in case it is a really close score. And in the end, its just a game. People are whining about the results like children.

  7. If Popularity was determined on the people that joined and not the people that joined AND participated on the event, then that will make the result even more unfair.

    1. That’s the thing, no one really knew who was more popular during the event. I think that’s the better move in Splatfest because of there was some sort of indication or if Nintendo openly says “Currently there are more players on Team X than Team Y” then people would have just flocked to the other team and overwhelm them.

      The reason Nintendo won’t say them is to make it easier on the matchmaking system. They did delay splatfest for 2 weeks just to make sure everything would run smoothly and not have a repeat failure like what happened in Japan’s Splatfest. So good on them, right? Everyone got to play a lot of 4v4 battles instead of 4v1.

  8. Well, Dogs only won because they had more players. Cats actually “played better” and won more games at lesser numbers.

    Just saying :P

  9. To people saying Splatfesf is a popularity contest:
    1. Sometimes Team Dogs had to face Team Dogs, and those tallies didn’t count which hindered the win rate.
    2. The cat win rate was only greater by TWO PERCENT.

    1. I’m from Team Cats, figure I should get that out first and I just want to make a few points regarding what you have said.

      1) As someone mentioned above. It’s a given when Team Dogs vs Team Dogs it doesn’t earn them points but there is also no punishment on their side if either of them loses, instead you’re rewarded on personal splat points that can help raise your levels(and earn more shells by reaching the level cap) and give you more experience without any risk of losing more points to the Cats. Cats on the other hand had to constantly up their game because there wasn’t any Cats vs Cats, every match is the real deal, Cats had to put in their best without room to breathe and winning under those circumstances is definitely a great deal. Of course one could also said some of the best Dogs players are occasionally stuck in Dogs VS Dogs matches but Cats had the disadvantage of having to win more matches to cover more points almost every single time, and not all good Cats players play Splatfest for 24 hours. I acknowledge the fact that Dogs win and I’m happy for them but please be fair and realize that Team Dogs DOES have a clear advantage.

      2) 2 percent when written as it is sounds small, but you’re forgetting the small amount of % is a huge number when you factored in the US population, not to mention there are people outside of US who played the NA region, I myself am one of those people. These 2% could easily mean a few thousand matches, more or less.

      1. 1. But still, those matches didn’t matter, which means we had wasted matches would could’ve been used for Dog vs. Cat battles.
        2. Still, 2% still would equal a somewhat small amount compared to how many people participated.

        1. 1) I get what you’re saying but my point is just that. You might think it’s wasted and it seems bad overall on your side but Cats have it just as bad if not worse for having less players. And by wasted you’re assuming the Dogs players will always win when they’re up against the Cat players which is something I won’t be so certain. Dogs are allow to fail from time to time and make it up with their numbers but not so much for the Cats due to our disadvantages. But in all honesty, I couldn’t care less about the results, I had great fun (and 18 sea snails). Just wanna share with you my thoughts on this.

          2) I’m assuming you know how many participated then? I’m of a mind that you’re thinking it to be a small amount while I’m the opposite. Judging by the lack of Cat players and how many times the Dogs have to go up against themselves or 4 Dogs against 2-3 Cats, I would say the gap is pretty big and further strengthen how many times Cats have to win to get the 2%.

          1. 1. I’m not saying the dogs will always win obviously, but when they were facing they’re own team it was wasted on a Cat vs. Dog battle that they COULD’VE won, helping the win rate.
            2. Of course I don’t know exactly how many participated, but usually two percent of any number is usually small compared to the actual number. Example: 2% of a 1,000 is 20 (I hope I did that math right, lol), and so on and so on.

            1. 1) In short, there is no certainty and I really don’t think that makes Dogs at a huge disadvantage comparable to Cats. In fact one could also say it saves Team Dogs a loss if the less skilled ones are pitted against each other rather than with the Cats. But hey, I encountered some really skilled Dogs players myself and those were some of the best and fun matches I had in Splatfest.

              2) Don’t worry, your math is correct but that’s only provided there were only 1000 players playing lol. They sold a million copies worldwide in which America holds 476,000 sales (http://www.digitaltrends.com/gaming/splatoon-sells-one-million-worldwide/), it would be a shame if there wasn’t at least one or two hundred thousand players participating in the first Splatfest. Let’s say 100,000 people are playing the NA region, 2% means 2000. That means roughly extra 2000 matches were won by Cats. It’s quite a lot to be honest.

              1. My bad, I meant to say 100,000 matches were played by NA region players, not 100,000 people.

              2. 1. Not saying the disadvantage was huge, but it still put the Dogs in a somewhat unfair place.
                2. Quick disclaimer: I wasn’t saying 1,000 people played, it was just an example.
                Anywho, 2,000 compared to 100,000 is still a somewhat small amount. (Again, compared to 100,000)

                1. 1) Yeap, that’s what I have been trying to say. It’s a bit unfair but not a disadvantage as big as the cats for having lack of players.

                  2) I guess this is just a matter of opinions then. You personally think it’s not a huge number but I’d think to win an extra 2000 matches with a team consists of almost half the amount of team dog is a great deal. Imagine 50 cats/200 matches won, 100 dogs/180 matches won. Each cat has to win 4 matches while each dog has to win 1-2 matches.

                  1. 1. Still, the number of cat players most likely also affected the number of dog players who would encounter dog players. So, that means the disadvantage was pretty equal.
                    2. Of course, 2,000 is a huge number. But compared to 100,000, it’s not.

                    1. 1) Not really equal imo. You’re free to think so which I respect but to me it isn’t.

                      2) It’s huge in terms of winning rate, not by literal figures.

  10. Everyone: “This was bullshit because *wall of text*, it was unfair and I should have won”
    Me: “Uh, I think I can find use for 1 or 2 seashells… from the 18 I got”

    Honestly though, it might seem a bit unfair for popularity to be a deciding factor, but if you think well about it, it serves to balance the competition when the difference on the team sizes is too big (which is what happened).
    If you really want to be 100% fair, Dogs X Dogs matches should give points for the dog team regardless of the result. And if this scenario was true, team Dog would get much more win points than team Cat, due to the fact of having much more players.
    Truth is: if Popularity didn’t count, Dog matches would be a waste of time for the 8 players, because they are already fighting against each other without getting points.

    TLDR: Popularity might seem unfair, but without it this competition would be a giant waste of time for the majority of players (team dog), as they wouldn’t be earning any points or advantage for fighting against each other multiple times due to the lack of opposing teams.

  11. Sooo… I don’t care so much about the odd method of using a popularity contest to judge skill. What I noticed is that I was playing with European and even Eastern players online so… does that mean like, say, Cats in America were paired with Rock in Europe and Bread in Japan?

    … Super confusing…

  12. Too numerous to over come? We beat them in battles DESPITE that. They only one because of popularity!!

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: