Online competitively multiplayer games without chat...worth?

So I'm developing a competitively multiplayer game for a little over a year and it's coming along really well. I don't want to talk about the specifics of the game but the broad concept is it is a strictly online fast paced competitive match-making game. I'm to the point where I'm designing how the players will communicate which got me thinking...
Does every competitive game have to have unrestricted text chat?
The more I think about it, the more unsure I get. In Rocket League, all the player is capable of 'typing' (most of the time) is pre-determined phrases (aka quick chat). In League of Legends pings are usually the primary form of communication. And in CounterStrike most people ignore chat completely as a means of communication outside of heckling while dead.

The common argument for having chat is that without it, the game would seem quiet and needlessly single-player. Yet, at the same time, I've stopped playing games all together just because of the annoying harassment/impossible to moderate community (ie League). Also, I'm not going to make the foolish assumption that just because text chat doesn't exist, toxic behavior wouldn't exist elsewhere. I'm just trying to figure out which one I would rather have: a competitive environment where text chat is a common inability, but leads to a much quieter game, or rather implement it and risk toxic behavior defining the community.

Of course there would be chat outside of games, but that will be an environment where the focus is already on chatting/non-gameplay actions.

What do you think? With the common answer being 'yes, implement text chat', do you think a that only sported quick-chat could survive?

 

I think you'll find people in multiplayer want both voice and chat equally. How can friends say BRB without a mic? don't look at your situation.

 

I think the quick-chat-only option is worth a try. Make sure it includes a good range of things a player might want to say ...but only the things you would want them to say. This should probably include some gentle razzing, but have it (and all messages, for that matter) rate-limited so a player can't grief by simply spamming it over and over.

And be sure any bots in your game make good use of the quick messages, too.

The thing I wonder though: in your game, is there any need for real communication for actual gameplay? In other words, would players want to say things like "you go up on top of that building, I'll flush them out for you" or "wait here 5 seconds, then come running"? Canned messages might not work so well for things like that.

 

But minimap highlights and hand signal animations might suffice and also bring some character to the interaction.

 

Yeah, if you can work out the set of things players need/want to communicate, then you can probably make some sort of UI to do that.

As a bonus, it removes any language barrier... I could be quick-messaging you in English, and you hear/see it in Japanese or whatever!

 

If you've played Counterstrike it would be very similar to that level of communication, but the minimap will be a lot more giving with information so yelling "I died here" isn't really necessary. But basic strat calling should be required.

I also like that. In a multiplayer environment we rarely get to fully 'roleplay' like that.

This is fantastic point, I've not thought of that. Hearthstone comes to mind. I've never given it much though but I've probably faced many people outside my language barrier.

 

My preference is quick chat between opposition players or players on the same team but not in a clan. Voice chat for clan members only. This reduces the chance of those abusive teenage boys that haunt these types of games. If players not in a clan want to chat let them use 3rd party software so they are then responsible, & not your company, for what happens in game.

 

While I am for quick chat and voice chat, don't forget that the more you limit chat the more you also limit community. A sense of community for a small game is vital. Sure you will get harassment, but you can't fear your player base Work hard at community building and management and let people talk and form bonds.

 

If voice chat is supported for clans then it might encourage people to join a clan. Once you are in a clan you are in a community that, & I speak from experience , passively encourage their members to spend more real $ than they probably would have just so they can raise their status within the clan. Clans then fight each other to be the best & that means playing a lot so it starts to feed into itself.

 

Go back to design fundamentals. What sort of experience are you trying to create? Player to player communication should be a part of the overall experience, not something tacked on as an afterthought.

Is your game a lightening fast shooter where quick reflexes are King? Direct voice chat is appropriate.

Is it a slower more nuanced simulation? Text chat

Is it fun and light? Maybe premade messages.

Is it primarily focused in role playing? Add in gesture functionality.

You get the idea. Define the experience the player is having, what it should feel like to play your game, and you are a long way to answering this question.

 

Hearthstone doesnt allow chat at all. Most likely to avoid toxidity. Now, that is a 1v1 game, so communication isnt super important. However i think other games are following suit. Cant check which atm. But im certain that there are other big titles coming up disallowing chat.
I would *guess* that Heroes of the Storm (a game from the same, very main-stream-pleasing developer, a LoL-style game) doesnt allow chat either, but that is just a wild guess (cant check these days).

Apparently, chat isnt needed*, rather it will be the indie exception to the mainstream rule of no free chat imho. Like dedicated servers.

[* That is on the assumption that other games are following suit. Personally, i appreciate chat in game.]

Quick-chat is very useful obviously and shouldnt be disruptive too often (although some people are actually complaining about the emotes in Hearthstone being used to be mean and turning them off - so probably a good idea to allow mute).

The worry that disallowing chat would make the game seem too single-player-ish seem to be contradicted by AAA-tendencies to remove chat altogether - although of course, for small indie titles i'd think that other rules have to apply. Your community will be smaller and hopefully friendly and non-toxic since they want more players around and support the game. But by disallowing chat you'll be right on the mainstream-train. Not sure if that's a good choice though, but no clue...

 

So long as you have an option to disable chat, because people are S***ty.

 

I think this is a great point. Create a system of communication that enables your players to communicate what they need to, like pings in MOBAs, and you enable players to communicate equally effectively regardless of their language, and you simultaneously ensure they can't abuse eachother (at least not as much as they can with voice/text chat)

 

Emotes. Ideally ones with animations tied to them rather than simply text.

 

A little bird that flips over, just so the teenage boys have one they can use

 

That was the exact example I was about to give.

They have an emote system though, with some 6 emotes like Greeting, thanks, well played, etc. for interaction. Plus, you have an additional option to squelch even the emotes if someone is irritating you. There is chat system in the game, but it can only be used for messaging with friends not to anyone. I think that's a clever move, restricting chat without restricting interactions would be the way to solve your problem.

 

Have you considered Splatoon? It's a well implemented multiplayer game without voice chat, so you could look into it.

 

As someone who was a competitive PC player, specifically in Unreal Tournament, Starcraft and Starcraft 2 inside the States as well as in S. Korea, you do not need to have in-game chat, but out-of-game chat is more than suitable.

In game chat leads to rage, harassment, etc... during a match (which can and does occur outside of the game as well). This in turns causes a flood of toxicity in the community and overall leads to poor outlook on the community.

Pending the region as well, will also show an increase or a decrease in the toxicity of players as well.

*Edit*

I was also a Technical Alpha Tester on Starcraft 2, Hearthstone and Heroes of the Storm. Hearthstone/Heroes of the Storm had various inputs for chat from both sides, and was determined for both games to remove chat against the opposing players/teams for the reason of toxicity, gloating and harassment, hence why people will have to add after the game to send you a message.

 

Speaking of Splatoon, there are other multiplayer games without voice chat.

Mario Kart, Smash Bros, Don't Starve multiplayer, multiplayer games played on hardware that doesn't support text chat or voice chats (old classic games), etc.

WoL, HoS, or LoV? If WoL or HoS, would you like to write a quick bios on our SC2 Hall of History thread in our forums? Just something minor, that's all.

 

Kids these days. There was a time when nothing had voice chat. And games did just fine. Now get off my grass!

 

Worked on all three since February 2010 to release of Legacy of the Void. Outside of this, also worked on Hearthstone (none of the expansions) and Heroes of the Storm. What exactly would you like me to do or write up?

 

I'll PM you then.

 

Please use voice and text. Sometimes mics don't work so using text to communicate is necessary.

 

It REALLY REALLY depends on your game take a moba for example which is relativly simple in terms of communication since you only have one map and most of the dept of the game lies in the combat/player builds not complex strats. So it is easy to great a "quick chat" with predetermined voice commands. But in a game like say counterstrike where positioning and what people buy everyround aswell as callouts are KEY to succes you cant limit players in what they can say or not.

 

What makes a game which ONLY has a Quick chat interesting is that people cant flame at eachother which is a real problem in MOBAs. I think does games would be so much more fun if people would just be nice to eachother.

 

Personally, I am strongly in favor of full communication in all multi player games. This does, certainly, open the door for toxic behaviour, but the result is, at least for me, much more fulfilling.

Games which prevent chat tend to do so at the cost of a sense of community. With Blizzard games, I've felt that they've moved away from that type of community since Battlenet 2.0. One of the major complaints from older SC fans is that the battlenet experience felt hollow, empty, and lonely. I also think that this played a role in SC2 lacking a great deal of long term player retention.

It does also depend on the genre of game, a competitive game that is designed to be really casual, Hearthstone, can get away with emotes far more than a more interactive game like a MOBA.

I also tend to think that raw game duration can play a large part in the text vs emotes. Recently I've been playing quite a lot of Blood Bowl 2. These matches are extreme in length (avg 1.5 hrs), having an emote system in this game would be seen as insulting and out of place in what is really a kind of 'serious' and certainly brutal game. This is also the only game I've ever seen that has meaningful, long term character progression and perma-death in a deeply competitive 1v1 setting.

 

If you could have a bounty system to balance it it would be interesting. And I guess I use the term balance loosely as it would be abused as well.

Let players put a bounty on someone but prevent team kills or kills from people that are on their friends list (to stop people putting bounties on each other & then claiming the reward as the bad guy sits there waiting to be killed). Also let people pool a bounty on one player so newer players have a chance of getting help to fund putting a bounty on a troll. Bountied players aren't told there is a bounty on their head but they get matched into harder games with none of their friends or clan members in the match.
If you are bountied & killed you lose a blanket 20% off all your stats but if you win you gain 10% to all your stats & the player that bountied you has the option to increase the bounty or forfeit what they paid & have the bounty cancelled. Cancelled bounties can go into a pool to fund rewards for special tournaments without upsetting the in game economy (since the rewards are funded by currency that was already in the game).

 

It depends on the type of game. Hearthstone is competitive, but in a 1v1 scenario you don't need to communicate with the other player. In a game like Counter Strike, you need to be able to communicate very detailed information with your team once you reach the higher ranks.

I personally dislike this trend towards 'no-chat' games that we're seeing, it's a cop-out by big developers like Blizzard by just saying 'ok, we'll never be able to manage the negative members of our games community properly, so we'll stop everyone from communicating'. Communication is part of what makes multiplayer games, well, multiplayer games, and can lead to some very memorable moments and unique experiences.

 

It's not technically a cop out. A lot of countries are introducing laws about online harrassment. Unless companies can guarantee safety &/or immediate action across international borders they run the risk of legal action & a lot of bad publicity. Some companies are willing to run that risk, others are deciding that the risk & bad publicity aren't worth the hassle.