Splatoon

[Sheikah]

Comparing games to films? Why? They're completely different.

 

Why not compare an online game to an offline game instead? If you ever play Smash with a friend locally, wouldn't you comment if your friend killed you in a skilful way? Or if you were pipped to the finish in Mario Kart?

[Fierce_LiNk]

When I go to the cinema, I don't go with friends who chat all the way through the film. I want to enjoy the film, follow the story, hear the script. When I leave the cinema, that's when I chat, discuss the highlights, things I didn't enjoy so much, question things etc. Or chat about something completely different.

 

I appreciate some people prefer to talk through the film, or to throw popcorn at people in front of them. To each their own.

 

That's a passive activity though, isn't it? Whereas gaming is active. When you're at the cinema, you're sitting back and have very little impact on how things play out. When you're playing something like Destiny or Battlefield, your actions do have importance to the outcome of the activity in which you're partaking in.

 

I think a lack of understanding is why people seem to be underestimating the importance of communication. It clearly is an important feature or else there wouldn't be so much upset over it. The final product could have it, but I doubt it will.

[Pestneb]

That's a passive activity though, isn't it? Whereas gaming is active. When you're at the cinema, you're sitting back and have very little impact on how things play out. When you're playing something like Destiny or Battlefield, your actions do have importance to the outcome of the activity in which you're partaking in.

 

I think a lack of understanding is why people seem to be underestimating the importance of communication. It clearly is an important feature or else there wouldn't be so much upset over it. The final product could have it, but I doubt it will.

 

Playing a single player game is still active. The social element is what communication brings.

 

And sure, that social element is obviously very important to several people, I understand those people wanting voice chat... but I think obscure tried to make the point, if a game lacks a feature you want, you aren't the target audience. It's like Bayonetta, there are LOTS of elements in that game that I love, but at the same time there are one or two that really put me off. That's my personal taste, so I lost interest in the game and sure, as a gamer I will be missing out, and it is a shame. But I didn't go on the Bayonetta 2 thread moaning and bitching and proclaiming the game was shit, because there were elements that put me off buying it.

This game has got elements that will interest certain gamers. The lack of voice chat means a lot of you won't consider it. That's a shame, and I understand the upset when a game that you were interested in develops in ways that you wish it hadn't, but that's life.

 

Anyway, I imagine the voice chat will be like MK8, friend chat in lobby only, that's what I'm expecting.

[Ashley]

That argument holds no ground.

 

The very process of going to the cinema has been designed to minimise conversation (darkened room so you can't see people, strict rules about what you can do in there, loud speakers etc) whereas the same is not true for games.

 

It's like saying we shouldn't pursue better quality graphics because games are ultimately stories and books just have words.

[Goron_3]

CoD, Splinter Cell etc. still have solid online presence on the Wii U despite being third party and selling like crap.

 

And by solid, you mean?

 

[Pestneb]

That argument holds no ground.

 

The very process of going to the cinema has been designed to minimise conversation (darkened room so you can't see people, strict rules about what you can do in there, loud speakers etc) whereas the same is not true for games.

 

 

Splatoon, apparently, begs to differ....

 

It's like saying we shouldn't pursue better quality graphics because games are ultimately stories and books just have words.

 

Only if you choose to ignore the point I was making. Obviously no analogy is going to be fool proof, but films can be watched at the cinema, in a tv at home, on a portable screen, on your phone, PC etc.

To make things clearer, my focus wasn't on the cinema as an entertainment medium.

My point was simply that not talking during the experience doesn't preclude some sort of social interaction. The nature of that interaction isn't immediate, but it is still there.

Edited February 9, 2015 by Pestneb

[Ronnie]

Yeah, let's start complaining again! :p

 

Unfortunately I'm not interested in the single player for this. I think it just looks so-so, the multiplayer looks like it could be really good but without being able to talk to each other, for me, it loses something very important. I do hope chatting with friends is in.

 

Ok I take back my last post about wanting voice chat discussion to return. Now I know what it would be like to relive the same three days over and over, talking to the same people and hearing the exact same stories over and over.

[Wii]

Splatoon - Nintendo Direct Discussion (Thoughts & Impressions)

 

 

[Serebii]

And by solid, you mean?

 

Decent few thousand online at any one time. Matchmaking is fast.

[Hero-of-Time]

Decent few thousand online at any one time. Matchmaking is fast.

 

I could be wrong here as it's been a while since I played it but during the launch period I don't remember ever seeing a few thousand on CoD on the Wii U. Maybe just over a thousand. @kav82 is probably a better person to ask. I do know you couldn't really get a game on a bunch of certain game types due to the community being far too low.

 

Splinter Cell was a nightmare finding matches online, although it was probably just due to Ubisofts shoddy servers.

[Kav]

Decent few thousand online at any one time. Matchmaking is fast.

 

I could be wrong here as it's been a while since I played it but during the launch period I don't remember ever seeing a few thousand on CoD on the Wii U. Maybe just over a thousand. @kav82 is probably a better person to ask. I do know you couldn't really get a game on a bunch of certain game types due to the community being far too low.

 

Splinter Cell was a nightmare finding matches online, although it was probably just due to Ubisofts shoddy servers.

 

CoD Ghosts has around 700/800-ish people online at a time, sometimes as low as 500 and around 1,000 at most.

It's slightly better for Black Ops 2 but not much, around 1,200 at most but more people play regularly. The numbers tend not to be as low as Ghosts might go.

"A few thousand" on either game at any time is rubbish, it's never happened. It's been a couple thousand at the busiest time on Black Ops 2 and it never got to that on Ghosts.

 

You get games but can wait a bit if you're searching for better connections.

Edited February 10, 2015 by Kav

[Hero-of-Time]

Yeah, I thought it was around the 1000 mark. Ah, good times playing CoD with you guys. Such a laugh.

[Wii]

I could be wrong here as it's been a while since I played it but during the launch period I don't remember ever seeing a few thousand on CoD on the Wii U. Maybe just over a thousand. @kav82 is probably a better person to ask. I do know you couldn't really get a game on a bunch of certain game types due to the community being far too low.

 

Splinter Cell was a nightmare finding matches online, although it was probably just due to Ubisofts shoddy servers.

 

COD Black Op II has under 1,000 certainly not much more than 1,200 anytime I ever played it. Quite often it's down around the 500 mark. Some modes you can never play because there's not enough people online. To get the most playing it needs to be at the weekend and while the Yanks are awake. The online world map with the light showing where people in the world at that time are playing it is quite handy. You sometimes find people in the most remote areas playing it.

[Sheikah]

@Serebii, still believe it's a solid fanbase? I know you go quiet in times like these!

[Serebii]

I could be wrong here as it's been a while since I played it but during the launch period I don't remember ever seeing a few thousand on CoD on the Wii U. Maybe just over a thousand. @kav82 is probably a better person to ask. I do know you couldn't really get a game on a bunch of certain game types due to the community being far too low.

 

Splinter Cell was a nightmare finding matches online, although it was probably just due to Ubisofts shoddy servers.

 

CoD Ghosts has around 700/800-ish people online at a time, sometimes as low as 500 and around 1,000 at most.

It's slightly better for Black Ops 2 but not much, around 1,200 at most but more people play regularly. The numbers tend not to be as low as Ghosts might go.

"A few thousand" on either game at any time is rubbish, it's never happened. It's been a couple thousand at the busiest time on Black Ops 2 and it never got to that on Ghosts.

 

You get games but can wait a bit if you're searching for better connections.

 

I stand corrected. Was going off second hand information. My apologies.

[Kav]

CoD had a decent enough community on the Wii. MWR, BO and MW3 had anywhere between 22k and 30k online during their quietest/busy times. 28k was a regular number, sure it's not like the figures the other consoles would get but they were numbers that always ensured you'd get a decent game at any time.

 

If the Splatoon community can get like that then it'd be great. If it does get voice-chat between friends it'll make it all the better.

[Hero-of-Time]

I stand corrected. Was going off second hand information. My apologies.

 

No need to apologise. No harm, no foul.

[Zechs Merquise]

The COD numbers on Wii were only viewable on Black Ops and MW3 (on WAW and MWR it never showed how many were online).

 

Black Ops peaked at over 50,000 at times (usually weekends).

 

Black Ops 2 on the Wii U peaked at around 4,000 (which was at weekends after the Wii U's first Christmas).

[Kav]

The COD numbers on Wii were only viewable on Black Ops and MW3 (on WAW and MWR it never showed how many were online).

 

Black Ops peaked at over 50,000 at times (usually weekends).

 

Black Ops 2 on the Wii U peaked at around 4,000 (which was at weekends after the Wii U's first Christmas).

 

Those numbers dropped drastically though don't forget. At Xmas there was always the huge bump in players but not as many play all year round like we used to. As year-round figures 28k on Wii was the norm and 1k for WiiU.

 

Man, those CoD Wii days were amazing! We had such laughs and owned so much. I hope this is replicated on Splatoon!

Edited February 10, 2015 by Kav

[dazzybee]

I'm worried about voice chat, but at least there's a way round. I'm more worried about not being able to create a team and go online.... Worried in nintendos desire for simplicity you can join a friend but it's random teams... And voice chat like mario kart. Fine in private matches but non in worldwide

[Kav]

I'm worried about voice chat, but at least there's a way round. I'm more worried about not being able to create a team and go online.... Worried in nintendos desire for simplicity you can join a friend but it's random teams... And voice chat like mario kart. Fine in private matches but non in worldwide

 

For me, I don't think MK voice-chat would cut the mustard. Don't forget, it's lobby chat, and that isn't a substitute for in-game chat.

 

I hope you can group up in teams prior to matchmaking too, surely this will be in..?

[Agent Gibbs]

I think instead of cinema as an example you could compare voice chat in a game to a sport like football

Whilst you can play football not talking shouting where to go etc as with practice you know your team and how they'd work with just a look, but its far better if the team can communicate

[Ashley]

Splatoon, apparently, begs to differ....

 

 

 

Only if you choose to ignore the point I was making. Obviously no analogy is going to be fool proof, but films can be watched at the cinema, in a tv at home, on a portable screen, on your phone, PC etc.

To make things clearer, my focus wasn't on the cinema as an entertainment medium.

My point was simply that not talking during the experience doesn't preclude some sort of social interaction. The nature of that interaction isn't immediate, but it is still there.

 

I'm not sure what you're suggesting in the first point? That Splatoon doesn't want interactions?

 

Not talking doesn't preclude some kind of social interaction, yes, but it sure as hell feels weird in modern gaming. Going from playing Destiny to playing MK just felt empty and hollow. I wanted to be able to say something to people as it happened, not several minutes later when you might well have to say "remember during the first lap when you hit me with that thing? Yeah, bastard".

 

Going to the cinema (and yes I'll grant that watching films in different contexts have different norms) you know that you will have to process the film and discuss afterwards. After all, you are watching something take place. In gaming you are doing something. There's a very real difference. Agency requires a voice. Without it, you don't really have agency. Being denied it constantly is being denied agency.

 

It's the same old argument that has come up here many times - the way games are played has changed a lot and while younger people do still get together more than adults to play game, Nintendo is ignoring how audiences are changing. How their audience has changed. They made us gamers, and now they're leaving us in the past.

 

It's tiring to hear/read this over and over again but ultimately who is to blame here? Should we just sit back and accept that Nintendo is never going to change?

 

I forget who it was, but someone a few pages back said (and I'm paraphrasing as I forget exactly) "OS level voice chat will probably maybe be on the next Nintendo console". To have that level of uncertainty about something that has been in other consoles for the last two generations is very telling.

 

To say that other similarish mediums don't allow conversation and yet you can still interact is not really a point worth making. TV doesn't really allow for interaction in the same way as games do, but reality TV shows let you vote. You can draw similar lines between any two things if you try, but I don't feel in this case it is worth trying.

[Ronnie]

Splatoon - Nintendo Direct Discussion (Thoughts & Impressions)

 

 

 

You're wasting your breath, no one here cares.

[obscure]

There's a few different discussions going on here, which is why I guess there's been sometimes confusion.

There's the topic of this game having voice chat.

The topic of OS level voice chat.

The topic of what are the modern social norms, pertaining to online gaming communication.

The topic of if a game wasn't intended to have, or doesn't have a certain feature by design; then because you want that feature, doesn't mean the game is universally crap (this was mainly what I was discussing).

..And more (What's that? You thought I was going to list every single side-topic like a loon, hehe.)

 

It's absolutely normal, of course, for a discussion to lead in many directions; however, just pointing this out might help untangle some of the mess.

I feel, and in my case know, there's been a few misunderstandings.

 

 

Going to the cinema (and yes I'll grant that watching films in different contexts have different norms) you know that you will have to process the film and discuss afterwards. After all, you are watching something take place. In gaming you are doing something. There's a very real difference. Agency requires a voice. Without it, you don't really have agency. Being denied it constantly is being denied agency.

What about someone suffering from muteness, but you're just talking about online video gaming, right? However, in that case we can then loop back to, what about someone suffering from muteness? :P

You can tell agency, by the way a player moves and controls their character. Supposing AI is sufficiently advanced enough though, then you wouldn't be able to tell whether or not you were playing against a human (I guess this is what you mean?).

Yet if AI advances even more, then perhaps even with voice chat, there will be no distinction between what has agency and what does not.

 

 

It's tiring to hear/read this over and over again but ultimately who is to blame here? Should we just sit back and accept that Nintendo is never going to change?

This is a pet peeve of mine. I find nothing more annoying, than people moaning and complaining about something, but not taking action and doing something about it.

If you're not going to do anything about it, and I presume Nintendo isn't reading this thread, then people going around and around in some sort of a whinge-fest, is not going to help anyone.

In fact, if anything, someone coming here to read about the Wii U, before an intended purchase; will quite probably be put off from buying one.