Squad-based shooters on PS3 doesn't work.

[psivamp]

BC2 was a great game because of how much it relies on teamwork. That reliance on teamwork is also one of its biggest problem and why I eventually traded it in. I pretty much abandon the hope that random people will work together as a team and play the best support role I can until friends come on.

 

[Azure-Supernova]

I fail to see why this is directed at the PS3 specifically, but I see your point. I'm just saying that it's the communities fault really. I can't say I blame half of them, there are some really arseholes online.

A microphones only lobby would be great. Usually I do only play with friends however and usually over Skype.

 

[Yoh3333]

I fail to see why this is directed at the PS3 specifically, but I see your point. I'm just saying that it's the communities fault really. I can't say I blame half of them, there are some really arseholes online.

A microphones only lobby would be great. Usually I do only play with friends however and usually over Skype.

I only have the experience from PS3 and as far as i know the PS3 doesn't come with headsets which xbox does so i thought it would be better

Side note: Skype is awesome

 

[number2301]

I would agree with comments that you can get round needing a mic by knowing your role, TF2 seems to get on fine like this.

I can't really see how the Xbox mic is useful for tactical play as whenever I've heard anyone I haven't been able to understand what they're saying due to the shitty quality.

The same is true for either 360 or PS3, but I have noticed that a lot less people use the headsets on PS3.

Yeah, that's because the PS3 comes with no mic and the 360 does (well, only the 250GB model, but that's the one gamers who are likely to play such games are going to want to buy).

My 20Gb Xbox came with a mic.

 

[AVATAR_RAGE]

I don't own a PS3 but the option to find people with Headsets only for your team sounds wicked. It might be a nasty experience on XBL but most of the times, I tend to meet like-minded folks who do cooperate out in the field.

I always keep saying:

"Teamwork is forged during combat."

First off nice saying, but the lack of team work is a problem for the ps3. I for do not use my head set a lot simply because of it being a hassle to set up (it some times does not recognise my voice), however I did use it a lot with MAG (at least when it was charged). Playing a command role in MAG almost required you to use a headset.

The problem came from the people playing, who abused the mic feature (discouraging teamwork) or chose a leader role and did not use a mic to communicate. The result was often an unorganised mess.

This was not helped by the fact that not everyone with a ps3 has a headset or any way of forming a private party. The 360 has the advantage here with party chat available for friends who are not even playing the same game to communicate, as well as shipping wit a headset. This passively encourages team work making it easier to jump in with strangers and get the job done.

 

[SammiYin]

I for one can't think of anything more horrifying then parties dedicated to xbox players with mics...

 

[Azure-Supernova]

I fail to see why this is directed at the PS3 specifically, but I see your point. I'm just saying that it's the communities fault really. I can't say I blame half of them, there are some really arseholes online.

A microphones only lobby would be great. Usually I do only play with friends however and usually over Skype.

I only have the experience from PS3 and as far as i know the PS3 doesn't come with headsets which xbox does so i thought it would be better

Side note: Skype is awesome

There are Official headsets for the PS3, but any old bluetooth or USB headset will work. The only complaint is the lack of 'party chat' so you have to use the games built in chat. In fact a number of times I've played Uncharted 2 I will more often than not run into a few mic users.

And yes, Skype is excellent :3

 

[Yoh3333]

the lack of team work is a problem for the ps3. I for do not use my head set a lot simply because of it being a hassle to set up (it some times does not recognise my voice), however I did use it a lot with MAG (at least when it was charged). Playing a command role in MAG almost required you to use a headset.

The problem came from the people playing, who abused the mic feature (discouraging teamwork) or chose a leader role and did not use a mic to communicate. The result was often an unorganised mess.

This was not helped by the fact that not everyone with a ps3 has a headset or any way of forming a private party. The 360 has the advantage here with party chat available for friends who are not even playing the same game to communicate, as well as shipping wit a headset. This passively encourages team work making it easier to jump in with strangers and get the job done.

Exactly!
I realy enjoyed MAG and often chose the Leadership roles and when just 1 squad did work together it made a difference, i don't get why so many people hated on MAG because i think it was a great game.

 

[AVATAR_RAGE]

the lack of team work is a problem for the ps3. I for do not use my head set a lot simply because of it being a hassle to set up (it some times does not recognise my voice), however I did use it a lot with MAG (at least when it was charged). Playing a command role in MAG almost required you to use a headset.

The problem came from the people playing, who abused the mic feature (discouraging teamwork) or chose a leader role and did not use a mic to communicate. The result was often an unorganised mess.

This was not helped by the fact that not everyone with a ps3 has a headset or any way of forming a private party. The 360 has the advantage here with party chat available for friends who are not even playing the same game to communicate, as well as shipping wit a headset. This passively encourages team work making it easier to jump in with strangers and get the job done.

Exactly!
I realy enjoyed MAG and often chose the Leadership roles and when just 1 squad did work together it made a difference, i don't get why so many people hated on MAG because i think it was a great game.

It was possible to play squad leader to with out a mic if people used way points and fraggos properly but other leader roles require a mic. Zipper didn't help much though, but thats a problem for another thread.

 

[Levi93]

The fact that most the people don't have headsets is awesome, it mean I can actually listen to my friends instead of the average 12 year old whos casually throwing racial slurs everywhere, mainly because me and my friends all own a mic or an eyetoy which can be used as a mic so this is not a prblem at all for us.

but yeah an option filter to play with gamers with mics would be pretty cool.

 

[viranimus]

Perhaps because in their current states headsets do very little to enhance the gameplay. As others have said, when you encounter someone with a headset your in most cases encountering someone who wants to spew hate or arrogance, A control freak who is obsessed with dictating other peoples play and takes a game entirely too seriously or people who confuse being able to talk to people online as a form of social interaction and friendship ending in VC about anything other than the game or the tactics involved. and the other seemingly only 1% who make up the people who use VC to enhance the game exp who inevitably realize that voice chat is laggy and delayed to the point that what is being said on chat channels is so far behind what is actually happening on screen or is so distorted into incomprehensibility (YAAAA 8) that it is nothing more than useless background noise.

Honestly, I dont get the desire to use headsets and voice chat at all. It really seems like a fad that had its time and is slowly passing away. Sort of like last generations motion control.

In the days since the original Xbox where headset use (at least for consoles) took off, we have improved VOIP technology greatly to the point it can basically replace a telephone, but yet for some reason Voice chat which uses VOIP still sounds static-y, crackly, distorted and delayed. Why is that? Because the people who develop the technology for the game realize that players are not using it for its intended purpose, so what is the point of investing effort into refining it?

Besides, even on a mulitplayer level, Games need to be solid enough to be playable without such communication first, and have VC as what it is supposed to be, an enhancement. To fail there is to leave a game broken and incomplete knowing large groups of people do not like VC and find it very counter immersive to a game play exp. Good examples of multiplayer that get this right are the Left 4 Dead series where everyone as an individual basically knows what they are supposed to be doing and need no such direction, or Demons souls where there is multiplayer and basically no VC at all, yet communication still exists.

 

[Baradiel]

I havent played BC2 for a while, but if I remember rightly you could only talk to people in your squad. Or was that Bad Company 1?

Anyway, some games have lobby search options for microphones. Halo: Reach has search checklist thing, where you can choose to be matched with people who play as a team or lone wolf, who are chatty or quiet, and talk shit or are polite. Never really use it, so I couldn't tell you if its any good. Was a nice touch anyway.

 

[The Hive Mind]

Even squad based shooters it doesn't really matter too much if nobody is talking, however in a cooperative game like L4D or... Nazi Zombies (crap, can't think of a non-zombies one) you're just shooting yourself in the foot by playing with anyone who doesn't have a mic -- its just impossible to have any sort of teamwork beyond helping people up when they get downed.

Fortunately for L4D, you can easily kick no-mic-ers, however on CoD you cannot, which is easily one of the worst things about the game for me.

 

[Therumancer]

Okay, first of all i love squad and team based games and especially shooters. I love the tactical aspects of games. One such game is battlefield bad company 2.

I bought it for my PS3 as my first entry into the franchise and i realy liked it. There was just 1 big big BIG flaw in it's multiplayer. People rarely used headsets (this is all for the PS3, i don't think there is the same problem for Xbox but i'll come to that in a minute) No headsets mean no communication and no communication leaves an otherwise strategic game to the lone wolf as with CoD.

I know the typical arguement "play with your friends and not randoms" but that doesn't apply for all people. I am the only one among my 30 friends on my friendlist who got the game on PS3. I then thought about it for a while and ended up thinking about a single mechanic i think should've been implemented: The ability to search after lobbies where people used headsets. I personally can't see why a game like battlefield wouldn't have that.

I now plan on getting Battlefield 3 for PC because i hope that more people have headsets, that is my hope atleast.

Point is: Do you think that games with a strategic aspect of gameplay should try to organize groups so that people can work together rather than going lonewolf? If so how do you think devs should go about it?

(Sorry if there is spelling and grammar mistakes, Im Danish so english isn't my first language)

Edit: This made me think about the upcomeing SOCOM game. Do you think that it will fall upon the same destiny as Battlefield? (i know they are different, but it is possible)

Well I think this is a big issue with the focus on multiplayer in games in general. They tend to totally overlook the factor of actual people being involved and playing.

To be entirely honest I have a very negative opinion of voice chat to begin with. I'm one of those people who thinks that raiding/PVP/etc... was better before it, with text based communication. Among other things it attracted more patient people, and encouraged people to pay attention. I do however understand that this is entirely impractical for console games.

To be honest, I think the idea of having multiple queues is a good idea, especially in ranked matches. Pitting those who want to do the multiplayer stuff "lone wolf" against groups of similar players, and coordinated groups ofpeople with voice chat against those with similar set ups exclusively.

But then again my situation IRL is such where I don't much care for verbal communication online anyway.

 

[MuppeTeN]

When i played CoD or Halo i tend to not use the mic or mute players after 1 min or so of play, cause of 12yold screaming and cursing all the time, but when i played Horde on GoW2, or anarchy in Bulletstorm it's a great help.

Once in a while I end up with a kill whore who messes the team challenge >.<

 

[SilverStuddedSquirre]

Okay, first of all i love squad and team based games and especially shooters. I love the tactical aspects of games. One such game is battlefield bad company 2.

I bought it for my PS3 as my first entry into the franchise and i realy liked it. There was just 1 big big BIG flaw in it's multiplayer. People rarely used headsets (this is all for the PS3, i don't think there is the same problem for Xbox but i'll come to that in a minute) No headsets mean no communication and no communication leaves an otherwise strategic game to the lone wolf as with CoD.

I know the typical arguement "play with your friends and not randoms" but that doesn't apply for all people. I am the only one among my 30 friends on my friendlist who got the game on PS3. I then thought about it for a while and ended up thinking about a single mechanic i think should've been implemented: The ability to search after lobbies where people used headsets. I personally can't see why a game like battlefield wouldn't have that.

I now plan on getting Battlefield 3 for PC because i hope that more people have headsets, that is my hope atleast.

Point is: Do you think that games with a strategic aspect of gameplay should try to organize groups so that people can work together rather than going lonewolf? If so how do you think devs should go about it?

(Sorry if there is spelling and grammar mistakes, Im Danish so english isn't my first language)

Edit: This made me think about the upcomeing SOCOM game. Do you think that it will fall upon the same destiny as Battlefield? (i know they are different, but it is possible)

THIS IS WHY THERE ARE CLANS. HELL, JOIN UP TO MY CLAN ON PSN GUY. lOOK UP Heretic-_-Joker
and tell him Squid sent ya. If you can play like a teammate, you're hired

 

[hecticpicnic]

I don't bother for fear of being ear raped.

 

[Physics Engine]

I don't seem to have any problems playing BFBC2 effectively with no mic on PC. I think that's how the controls are layed out for a keyboard though. For BC2 on PC the spot button is 'Q' so you can bet I'm spamming that 'Q' every time I see some enemy units bearing down on our squad. On PS3 and 360 the spot button is "back/select" and not in a convenient place for quick spotting or calling for ammo/heal/repair or whatever. I can see how that would make teamwork with no mic a hassle.

Though, I'm sure I should figure out this PC voice chat stuff... I don't know how to begin with it so I just keep on keeping on.

 

[LordPsychodin]

I can say for both PC and PS3 games while I do have a microphone, it's mostly used for skype and trash talk in games. most of the time my outgoing for even games like Team fortress 2, I mute the mic and disable incoming voice. Headsets are nice, but you should never expect tactical use of it from a stranger in a game, nor should you ever feel obligated to listen into others using them.

 

[MrGalactus]

Headsets? Microphones? Psshh, who needs 'em. [http://www.g4tv.com/thefeed/blog/post/710718/Brink-Video-Interview----Putting-A-Fresh-Spin-On-The-Squad-Based-Shooter.html]