Well they did say that the reason there's no voice chat is because it would give an advantage for those utilizing it fully versus those who are not. In addition, it would give an advantage to people who have played shooters in the past versus those who are new to the genre. I imagine in Japan there exist many players who have not played many shooters, if at all.

They wanted all players to play on the same level: no voice chat for anyone in other words. In this regard, a mute function would not help in leveling the playing field.

I see the bolded a lot too, and I think it's far more obvious that if voice chat were implemented, it would be an option to turn it on, not off. As in it would be disabled by default. You also give too much credit to gamers, considering some couldn't even be arsed to figure out how to disable gyro controls.

Are you sure it wouldn't impact the performace at all? Is there a reason Mario Kart 8 allows voice chat with friends in the lobby, but not during gameplay? I assumed that would be why.

My point stands that the most obvious thing they could have done is to not include voice chat, because they didn't want to.

Are you deliberately refusing to read any further than that second quote at this point?

"We think there are two reasons for wanting to use it: to play strategically, and to know what you opponent is feeling. We designed the game so that it's still possible to play strategically (...) In terms of knowing what your opponent is feeling, we hope that you will also understand that it can also have a negative effect too."

Does this need a tl;dr? It's pretty short. Here it is anyway.

tl;dr: players use voice chat to strategize and to yell at each other. we made design choices to allow players to strategize without voice chat, meaning they also cannot yell at each other.

or how about "we want players to develop strategies without using voice chat, which we have made possible with our design choices."

I was streaming Splat with a friend. And I alerted him over skype that the other team was inking our base. So he returned and helped.

If your friend would pay more attention to the map he's holding in his own hands, you wouldn't have to tell him anything.

The drawback of the map not being on the TV screen.

Seems like an odd thing for them to do. It would be easiest to just have all the content out from the start. This isn't going to help people coming in later. They're going to face this problem anyways, so it seems pointless in the end. Just have it all out from the start.

And the VC, I feel it's not really needed. The amount of times I played, I never really felt the need for it, and thinking about it now, may be distracting if there was VC. So I won't really miss it. VC was part of the reason I didn't like shooters anyways. No problem here.

The map would look a lot smaller on the TV screen. When it is in your hands it is like having a second TV screen. You can see many more details that way. You can even tell what kind of weapon the person inking up your base is using. If the map was on the TV you'd have a hard enough time picking up on a general impression of how much of each color was on it.

This reminds me of people who claim it's impossible to play a Souls game without looking up what to do on the internet, and the solution is the same for both games.

Oh I had no idea Nintendo gamers were fawn that are so easy to scare off from a game they paid $60 for.

Oh no a team that can strategize would beat a disorganised team, can't be having that. 

people keep pulling up "youll play what we tell you to play" arguments, but if its their game, they decide how they want it. if you arent happy with it dont buy the game.

the content feels natural and longer lasting than most other multiplayer games. it would be one thing if the DLC was paid, but its free, so why complain?