I'm not against squads but I think they might shift the social paradigm...

[Robotoboy20]

Question!

Are there any examples of elitism from Splatoon players past "Wow my team sucks!" which is actually a valid complaint since you have a good chance of getting matched with actual 9 year olds who are just messing around.
Once we get private lobbies even that won't be a complaint anymore. I'm asking because I certainly haven't seen any outright bashing of a group of people past laggy rollers from Japan or something.
The implication made in the OP is that just having squads/tournaments will make a rift between players, but this is a thing that happens normally in any kind of multiplayer game. There's a difference between someone who plays League because they like going "BREAK THEIR RANKS" as Garen and someone vying for Silver or Gold or whatever, and this isn't bad.

Splatoon is a team based, mulitplayer shooter, as missingno said, squads are kind of inevitable, which is FINE. Playing for fun and playing seriously with squads are absolutely not mutually exclusive, and anyone who acts like it is will likely get put in their place.

As for weapons, there's good and bad weapons/sets, or ones that favor a certain mode or play style. If all the weapons were equally good, there wouldn't be a point in playing anything but Splattershots, someone saying X isn't viable will likely also back up their claim-"Man the Luna blaster sucks and anyone who uses it is a slimy hipster" probably won't catch on.

Lastly, for every elitist in TF2, there's 3 other guys willing to help a new player learn how to Rocket Jump. Emphasizing the bad angles of a community and neglecting the good points does nothing but cripple any attempt at discussion.

While that's true, I have seen people on the reddit, in streams, and on here talk about how certain weapons are "horrible, don't ever use them if you want to win!" when I disagree with that. In fact I disagree that all weapons are equal too, but it's not in the same way that you put it. What I worry about is the social aspect of "if you don't play in a squad, you suck!" kind of mentality that a lot of communities get. Yeah there are nice people willing to teach people how to do things in TF2 but honestly? TF2 is fairly toxic... I mean there are decent groups of players, but I had to stop playing that game for the very reason I state.

There's also the fact that people talk about how "useless" some weapons, and subs are, which is totally uncalled for, because that ruins diversity, and variety in gameplay. The weapons are equally good - as said by the devs themselves, and I'll take their word for it over a randoms. Using the word "equal" so tightly isn't really how you should view it... instead - you should view them all as equally viable.

Also even though you are correct about rifts happening in any multiplayer game - that's what I don't want to happen... it drives some away from those games who would otherwise enjoy it.

Anyways if you read my later post you'd see that this was a topic for discussion and not a solid "I'm completely against squad play!!! BLEH!" I have no issues with it but I had some fears about it and wanted to know if anyone else felt the same.

 

[Friendan]

While that's true, I have seen people on the reddit, in streams, and on here talk about how certain weapons are "horrible, don't ever use them if you want to win!" when I disagree with that.

Unfortunately, there are some weapons where you are just harming yourself AND your team by using them. For example, the rapid blaster gets outclasses by every single weapon. Very high TTK, very high effective TTK, small blast radius, and high ink consumption. I guess it does have a bit longer range than the blaster, it's ridiculous that 2 splash damage blaster shots kill earlier than a missed shot followed by 2 direct hit rapid blaster shots.

The weapons are equally good - as said by the devs themselves, and I'll take their word for it over a randoms. Using the word "equal" so tightly isn't really how you should view it... instead - you should view them all as equally viable.

The devs aren't always right, as they are usually not the best players in the game. Some weapons/subs could do really well in public servers, but can be completely useless in competitive. An example of this is the Brass Beast in tf2, before the patch of course. it destroyed pubs, but was horrible in competitive.

 

[Robotoboy20]

Unfortunately, there are some weapons where you are just harming yourself AND your team by using them. For example, the rapid blaster gets outclasses by every single weapon. Very high TTK, very high effective TTK, small blast radius, and high ink consumption. I guess it does have a bit longer range than the blaster, it's ridiculous that 2 splash damage blaster shots kill earlier than a missed shot followed by 2 direct hit rapid blaster shots.

The devs aren't always right, as they are usually not the best players in the game. Some weapons/subs could do really well in public servers, but can be completely useless in competitive. An example of this is the Brass Beast in tf2, before the patch of course. it destroyed pubs, but was horrible in competitive.

I don't know I don't really want to go into that though... because that's what I don't want to happen... homogeneous weapon assortment... it makes for a very dull game. (imo) I will say that the Rapid Blaster is quite good when ran with strength ups.

 

[superman]

Well there's life lessons to be learned here :D

I have been one of Germany's better athletes in my sport when I was 16-17 and to tell you the truth - I've been a **** to my rivals. It was an individual sport and the only guys I could be friends with were the ones starting in different disciplines. Competition will do that to you! That doesn't mean that you can't be nice in casual events or games or that you can't respect your rivals but if you don't hate them there's probably something wrong with you.

IMO there is no place for elitist behaviour in anything else than private games, everything else is just you being a ****.

That being said, it's human nature to be competitive and that will oftentimes bring out the worst in people, I've seen people obsess over absolute BS and they never had any history of being competitive. I guess it's just something you have to live with. More often than not people are acting like that because they can't admit to theirselves that they've been taken to school - these days that's probably the most enjoyable part about competition to me :D

I don't have too much experience with clans in public games because in all the games I've played I knew all the good players and we took our practice and competition to private games, most people running around with their clan tags in public games have usually been cannon fodder.

I should add that things have changed once I grew older and that team sports or games might have a different culture

 

[SquiliamTentacles]

I fear that Squads will become super competitive and have little room for more casual players, but hope the ranking system will separate pros from average players from nubs.

 

[Mr.HawK]

I fear that Squads will become super competitive and have little room for more casual players, but hope the ranking system will separate pros from average players from nubs.

not true at all. we encourage casual players to learn about the game more so that it helps them improve, and if they don't want help then we let them be them.

 

[Drez]

Naturally, I'm going to want to win. I just think first when you play a game, you play it solely for 'fun'. Then you realize that (or at least I will), you are not as good as the best in your 'group', and you'll want to get better, to win. I do get frustrated with this, and I'm only on my fourth day of playing Splatoon.. If you don't ever get to the point of thinking that, then so be it.

Anyway, I just feel like you also may just fear the name 'squads'. Also consider it may be just because it's one letter off from 'squids'. It's clever. Would you have a problem with it if it just said 'teams'. "Hey guys who wants to join my team???" What else would you do if you want to join people who have similar interests to you? (I'm also thinking of the mmo guild thing)

Tell me what you'd put in instead to make it a better environment in your eyes. You can't just point out a problem without thinking of a solution, or at least trying.

 

[AceExPãY]

I think this will only give the players more options on how they want to play the game. It's not like any of this is forced on you, so you should be fine!

Don't worry about the future atmosphere of Splatoon, just have fun! Any game like this will naturally have people that want to take the game more seriously, so it's to be expected.

 

[Pivi]

TF2 is fairly toxic... I mean there are decent groups of players, but I had to stop playing that game for the very reason I state.

Oh, I'll concede there, I know how 6v6 mains like to poke at 9v9 mains or people who enjoy playing Pubs, Not to mention "Oh the Beggars is a crutch" "Gunslinger engies are cancer" ect ect, I'm glad we aren't TF2boards

There's also the fact that people talk about how "useless" some weapons, and subs are, which is totally uncalled for, because that ruins diversity, and variety in gameplay.

I think it's a matter of situation and how a weapon can deal with said situations. Because, say, the Seeker can help you deal with a myriad of issues, people generally think of it as a pretty useful sub. Compare this to the Ink Mine, which only really works if someone is tricked into stepping on it, and gets completely checked by the Bomb Sniffer ability. Since this can only be used in a few situations, people wouldn't make this out as a go to sub.
Every Splatoon weapon, sub and alt are worth using, but some simply work out better than others in straight firefights, I don't think people would say these things without reason.
Anyway, we arent even close to being Tf2, and on top of that, we don't have all the weapons yet. Theres...what? 50+ coming? This partiular topic is better saved when we have everything imo

ALSO please remember in the August update, we can have 2v2s, 3v3s,1v1s, ect ect. It's entire possible for a meta to form around 2v2s, and you wouldn't need a squad for that, just a pal.

Something to remember is that we aren't Smash, MK or TF2, and I doubt we'll end up like any of these either.

 

[Drez]

ALSO please remember in the August update, we can have 2v2s, 3v3s,1v1s, ect ect. It's entire possible for a meta to form around 2v2s, and you wouldn't need a squad for that, just a pal..

I would love for that to happen.

 

[missingno]

While that's true, I have seen people on the reddit, in streams, and on here talk about how certain weapons are "horrible, don't ever use them if you want to win!" when I disagree with that.

Well the key there is "if you want to win". Fact is, not all weapons are good, and using something like the Rapid Blaster means you are putting yourself at a disadvantage. If you don't care, you're welcome to use it anyway, but to say that we should just pretend all weapons are equal and refrain from giving advice to people who come here looking for it is absurd. We're not about to deny the truth just because you don't like it.

There's also the fact that people talk about how "useless" some weapons, and subs are, which is totally uncalled for, because that ruins diversity, and variety in gameplay. The weapons are equally good - as said by the devs themselves, and I'll take their word for it over a randoms. Using the word "equal" so tightly isn't really how you should view it... instead - you should view them all as equally viable.

Even that I don't agree with, not everything is viable at a competitive level. There are a number of duds, as well as weapons that are just plain outclassed by others who do the same roles better. Especially in this game where we have alternate sets - why use the standard Splattershot when you could be using the Tentatek, for example?

Of course the devs think they got it right, since they're the ones who would've changed anything they think is wrong, and likely did many times over the course of development. And obviously they would never come out and admit some weapons suck, that's just bad marketing after all. But the devs aren't omniscient and they can't see the future of how the metagame will develop. They're humans, and humans aren't perfect. No game made by humans has ever had perfect balance, and no game ever will.

I don't know I don't really want to go into that though... because that's what I don't want to happen... homogeneous weapon assortment... it makes for a very dull game. (imo) I will say that the Rapid Blaster is quite good when ran with strength ups.

There's still a variety of good weapons, just not all of them. And even if there weren't, that'd be the devs' fault, not ours.

Strength ups really don't come close to solving the Rapid Blaster's problems, even its minimum TTK is too long and it doesn't really have any redeeming qualities to make up for its glaring shortcomings.

 

[RespawningJesus]

Of course the devs think they got it right, since they're the ones who would've changed anything they think is wrong, and likely did many times over the course of development. And obviously they would never come out and admit some weapons suck, that's just bad marketing after all. But the devs aren't omniscient and they can't see the future of how the metagame will develop. They're humans, and humans aren't perfect. No game made by humans has ever had perfect balance, and no game ever will.

Well, the thing is, who are the devs balancing the game for? Are they balancing for the average people, the competitive people, or the casual people? Depending on this, they could easily say that the game is balanced from their perspective, since they know exactly who they are designing and balancing the game for. We can obviously rule out the fact that the game is not being developed for the competitive side of things, since it is extremely obvious what weapons are the main go tos for the best chances at winning, much like how fighting games have the best characters.

So this leaves us with two choices? Is the game being developed for the casuals, or the average players?

 

[Kowai Yume]

Look at tf2. Nothing elitist there. There tends to be a difference between fps teams and mmo guilds.

Obviously you have never been on the competitive side. Heck, even in lobbies, which are simulating a comp tf2 match, you get these "elitist" scrubs talking down on you if you don't use the "correct" loadout even if you are doing well with it. For example, there was this Heavy who was using the Brass Beast and doing pretty well with it. There was another person on my team who was complaining about this despite positive results. Heck even in pubs I got yelled at by some guy from ExTV (who stream comp tf2 regularly) for using the vaccinator. All in all, there are going to be elitist and "Stop having fun" guys out there, it's just best to brush it off.

 

[Friendan]

I just don't think that someone saying "hey, you should use this weapon instead of this" isn't elitist. Even if you have a problem with it, the word "elitist' is kind of a huge overstatement.

 

[Kowai Yume]

I just don't think that someone saying "hey, you should use this weapon instead of this" isn't elitist. Even if you have a problem with it, the word "elitist' is kind of a huge overstatement.

Well I'm all for advice but it's just the way they presented is what I have a problem with. They weren't saying "hey this weapon is better for this situation" they were lashing out and saying "USE THIS WEAPON AND NOTHING ELSE AND IF YOU USE ANYTHING ELSE YOU'RE A NOOB". That is what I find elitist.

 

[Drez]

Hmm, I think I see that in the League community too. Yet I feel that's inevitable if you see something work in high level play, so it's branded as what 'should be done'. Then people ascribe to that, and then don't really think about other options when it's considered a 'un-optimal' play. I guess in the big picture, none of us know everything there is to know about anything. (Example: Let's say I know nothing about league, then read a guide that is really good and base my play on that alone for that character, that doesn't mean I know everything about that character from that alone, and ignoring anything else because of that would be a mistake... for some reason this seems like deja vu)

Another example: Teemo does well with an AP setup. Gets yelled at because 'Teemo isn't particular to AP but instead AD, don't use AP" (It's happened to me before)

---

Now this has me thinking even more, but of social dynamics. Is it 'bad' for someone to be telling you to do something they believe to be a better option for the better of the team? I do think one shouldn't be looked down upon at all for the choices they make (or yelled at, we aren't dogs), but I DO think that if a person thinks there is a better option, that you should be open to considering it, and both of you should have a civil discussion/argument.

Think of it this way. You are leading a group of players, and they are doing obvious mistakes. Consider that, you may get frustrated with their actions. Yet of course, no one purposely (or at least I hope not) commits actions to LOSE on purpose. I would expect that everyone tries to win, whether they are 'playing to win' or 'playing to have fun'. Never does anyone 'play to lose'. Therefore, wouldn't you want to let them know the mistakes they are comitting, so that they may be made self-aware of their own mistakes that are helping them (and the team) to 'play to lose' without that being their intent at all?

I will type more on this later but, I feel that a group talking about ways that are most likely better, is a good thing. It's just the attitude one wears when doing so. Sometimes a person can be wrong with their suggestion (or demand). That's why I think it's better to talk it out, so both parties come to learn from it. So both HEAVIES can learn from each other, instead of one looking down on the other.

 

[Yogororo]

If a "tier list" for weapons worries you that much that it makes you not want to play with the community, that is on you. Take it as a suggestion to do better, not as a demand. I want to main the L3 Nozzle Nose, which is a weapon I am comfortable with and can play fine, if anybody tells me I should use it ever I'll ignore them in a non comp setting. However, when push comes to shove and my team in comp is losing, I'll switch to a better weapon that I might not enjoy as much (i.e the Tentatek or Dyanamo). Its up to you to chose your weapon, not some guy on the internet, just remember that the gun might have some short comings like the Rapid blasters faults.

As for squads shifting the social paradigm, I honestly think the only places that will be affected is Squidboards and maybe Reddit. And the shift would most likely just be more talk about tourneys, changing rule sets, and such. There's not going to be some "elitist" uprising in the community or even a less friendly atmosphere.

 

[TheFlyingCule]

I don't think the squads will change anything as far as the mindset of people in Splatoon. If people are gonna be Elitists with their squads, they probably were already and probably spent all their time complaining about matchmaking and how much their team sucks, or how much a weapon sucks, that's how it always is. Heck there are even Mario Kart elitists, it's something we can;t escape. Regardless Splatoon is just a fun game that anyone can get into and enjoy, so the toxic part of the community will be outnumbered as it should be