More Talking Please

_Thresh_

<div class="IPBDescription">is the cry</div>For anyone not bored enough to have ventured into the eteam section, i've been looking into what people are saying about/around NS2 outside UWE forums.

I keep finding reference to something that might be worth a discussion.

"There is not enough talking in current (MP) games".

There's alot of emotion in the comments (why it perked my interest). They don't seem to mean "teamplay" per say. Seems to have a few more levels to it, read something fundamentally missing from MP games.

Was wondering what the experience/thoughts here is/are? Com short cuts in ns2?

Chris0132

There isn't much talking in <i>any</i> large successful multiplayer game. Most people aren't all that interested in it.

Really speaking it shouldn't be required, you should be able to communicate or simply intuit what needs to be done without having to explicitly tell or ask it. Intuition or simple deduction is always faster than talking, so you shouldn't rely heavily on talking. Especially if not everyone has a microphone, and games aren't really capable of facilitating a bunch of people using mic at once, you just get people talking over each other.

Not requiring talking is better than relying on it.

ScardyBob

I talk all the time, but I do so because I comm and people don't seem to know what to do quite often. Voice chat is also much easier than text chat, and I find that most of the players either don't have or don't use a mic.

PseudoKnight

<!--quoteo(post=1818108:date=Dec 21 2010, 06:50 PM:name=Chris0132)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Chris0132 @ Dec 21 2010, 06:50 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1818108"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->There isn't much talking in <i>any</i> large successful multiplayer game. Most people aren't all that interested in it.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->Most Valve games seem to have plenty of voice chatting (especially CS), but it's true of most other multiplayer games.

Deadzone

<!--quoteo(post=1818216:date=Dec 22 2010, 01:09 AM:name=PseudoKnight)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (PseudoKnight @ Dec 22 2010, 01:09 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1818216"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Most Valve games seem to have plenty of voice chatting (especially CS), but it's true of most other multiplayer games.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

I'm a big TF2 player and the voice channels are usually pretty lively there, too. Not everyone talks, and not everyone talks about important things (or just doesn't shut up) but there's not really a shortage of communication.

Savant

There would be more talking if there was a map in the game. It's hard to coordinate actions with teammates when no one is able to direct others to a location. I understand that this is something they are planning, and I think people will get more talkative when they have some way to direct people to their location.

Runteh

Valve have psychologists working at their offices. Take L4D2 for example. I have never spoken in any game as much.

Saying 'it shouldn't be needed' in a online format is... I don't actually have words for how wrong that is.

Communication is the fundamental goal this game should be aiming for. It should go like this:

# commander selects players (they should know this - communication)

# commander sends players to way point (this is also communication)

# commander tells players the plan in general. The situation at location, incoming aliens.. Etc etc.

If you could sum up this current century, what has been the mist important development? Internet, mobile phones?

Wait, arnt they a form of... Yup.

This is all about player / comm relationship again. If you think it isn't important, go and tell the army it's a waste of time and see how much they laugh at you.

It sounds simple, but it is a complex word. But unless a commander is in constant chatter you never really know what is going on. If you play any game, you'll know how much it makes a difference.

This still needs huge work, in terms of way points, location of players, status, GUI, etc... and you should be able to effectively organise a team with just a mouse. But players should be 'nudged / pushed' to use a mic.

# Voice cue : in selection 'incoming orders', 'move to point'.. If a build bot is sent somewhere, a decal on the ground saying 'build bot moving to point'. So those on location are not wondering what is happening whilst waiting in west cc.

These are all forms of dialogue. They need developing further, and there needs to be an emphasis on use of a mic.

PseudoKnight

You're talking about something that's better described as "feedback", and it's really important for any game. The best development of feedback usually comes during the polish or balance phase, which we haven't really reached yet, but it's so important it probably is in the minds of the developers frequently.

Theoretically, if in-game feedback is good enough, then you wouldn't have to communicate most things through the mic, just things like high level strategies.

Runteh

No, what I am talking about is communication. Feedback is one half of that equation. The other half being input.

Remember this involves humans playing humans as part of a team on-line. With one or more of that team having a perspective of the battlefield that perfectly suits his role of communicator.