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

Forums - Nintendo - Splatoon Producer Inks Out Reasons For Lack Of Voice Chat And Staggered Content Roll-Out

i feel like alot of people here are misunderstanding the level decision vs. the voice decision. They are not contradictory. When he says they left out voice chat because it could be tactical (paraphrase), he's saying they felt that tactics was not an encouraging reason to include the feature because you can be tactical without voice chat so you don't need it. It's not contradictory at all. It's incredibly stupid. but not contradictory.
I really don't mind the level delay thing. I do, however, think that the campaign should have sold by itself as a 30$ budget game. Then the multiplayer could have been a 30$ Downloadable title only with free updates.



Around the Network

Real answer: The higher ups at Nintendo were scared a young kid would here some bad words online.



Voice chat is one of the reasons why I don't play online shooters anymore. So Splatoon will be nice when I get my Wii U and the game.



the_dengle said:

I don't get it. His explanation of why they didn't implement voice chat is because they didn't want to. They didn't think their game would benefit from it. They didn't want to waste time or resources developing it, they didn't want it to be hogging system resources in-game.

It doesn't fit the creator's vision. That is the ONLY reason needed to justify the absence of any particular feature from a game. Criticize the game all you want for lacking that feature, but take it as it is. They do not need to give a better reason. There is no better reason.


so they did not want to invest the $ s to have voice chat and thats a good enough reason?  If people don t complain /critisize then how would the dev know what their target audience wants until its too late



I like that they designed the game to not need voice chat and removed voice chat so I don't hear the idiots that play the game without worrying that they have an advantage over me. I do think private matches should have voice chat though. That is something entirely differen, but I would just use teamspeak or skype to get passed that.



Around the Network
ArchangelMadzz said:
KLAMarine said:

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.

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

That's okay, good players can still beat bad players. Teams with good players will still beat teams with bad ones.



i cant believe the voice chat talk is still an on going topic :O



NND: 0047-7271-7918 | XBL: Nights illusion | PSN: GameNChick

KLAMarine said:
ArchangelMadzz said:
KLAMarine said:

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.

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

That's okay, good players can still beat bad players. Teams with good players will still beat teams with bad ones.

Good players still beat bad ones out of brute force. There's no set of organisation in the team, me and my friend aren't the best Cod players, but we won 57 straight games in 2v2 Face-off on Erosion/Aground because we knew exactly what each other was doing and never stopped talking. They should give people the choice, and if they can't do it say they can't or at least not come up with stupid reasons that can easily be solved.

When I play online I mute everyone other than my friends or if I'm alone then I will mute everyone. It's not hard, especially when every Wii U owner has a gamepad therefore a microphone to communicate. 



There's only 2 races: White and 'Political Agenda'
2 Genders: Male and 'Political Agenda'
2 Hairstyles for female characters: Long and 'Political Agenda'
2 Sexualities: Straight and 'Political Agenda'

the_dengle said:

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.

I don't know why you think an on screen map wouldn't be legible.  Even if it wasn't, there could just be a toggle to expand the map.  It's not like the gamepad screen is huge, and the map doesn't even cover a large portion of it.  Based on the size of my TV and the distance from my couch, a fairly typical minimap in the corner would be the same perceived size as the one on the gamepad resting in my hands.  Now of course, it's easier to put your face up to the gamepad than to the TV, but it is even easier to tap a button and make the mini map larger.  It would certainly be a lot more useful than the dpad taunt/chat in the corner, or the player status on top (not that the latter isn't useful information, but it could easily be displayed in a fraction of the size that it currently is).

Really, the ideal would just be to give you options for you to customize the UI.

Also, in regards to the original scenario about communicating to your teammates.  Just seeing the situation on the map doesn't necessarily tell you how to deal with it.  Without being able to communicate you can end up with situations where you overcommit and have everyone respond, or the opposite where everyone assumes someone else will deal with it.



Ka-pi96 said:
RolStoppable said:
Ka-pi96 said:

I'm sure people are enjoying it as is, but if they are enjoying what there is now surely having more maps and stuff would just make them happier, no?

And how is intentionally holding back finished content anything other than a horrible practice? If the content wasn't complete, then that would be absolutely fine. If however it is already complete and ready to play then it should be playable.

What a horrible thing to say. Why in the world would it be okay to release an unfinished game?

Think about what you just said. Your stance is that the despicable stuff that numerous third parties have pulled off is more acceptable or less evil than what Splatoon is doing. Think about it.

Well I do still think it would be better to wait until the content is all done and release it all at once. But if it's going to be free and released when it is finished then releasing the game a bit earlier and adding it in a later update would be fine. The only 3rd party developers I can think of that have done something like that are CD Projekt with The Witcher 3s free DLC and Rockstar with GTA Online. I am NOT referring to games with buggy/unplayable releases or those laden with microtransactions.


Just to let you know the content is pretty much done. A couple of unreleased maps (around 3-4) are in the single player as stages, it's just not available yet in the multiplayer.