Voice chat on the Switch will consist of a paid app on "smart" devices (your phone)

So does this mean you have to buy extra apps/ online subscription if you are more than one person in the household that wants to play online?
 
When I said I wanted voice chat in ranked Splatoon matches, people told me it would ruin their experience and 'go use Discord'. I guess Nintendo took that to heart.
 
Guys, you know that none of those actors in the unveiling trailer were playing anything, right? They had them have fun in front of black screens.
 
Well here's why. Nintendo made a console with a big tablet controller. The console didn't do so well with some complaints like "I have a real tablet, why do I want a tablet which is tied to this box?"

So Nintendo is working on this new thing and the controller has all kinds of tricks like some new rumble, depth sensors, gyro sensors etc and costs are getting high for just the controller.
They also have the problem of adding a 3.5 jack to a controller for all the configurations they have in mind. Nightmare. So someone said "The peons have tablets. Let them use them for voice chat." Boom. Here we are today.

So people complained that Wii U had a kind of tablet with all apps you would expect to have it, but it was not really a tablet as it had to stay tethered locally to the base console...

Nintendo's answer is to create a tablet that can work outside of the house, but they removed all the apps you would have wanted to use beyond games (social features, chat, multiplayer setup and management, web browser, and streaming apps)?

Should we wait for NX2 to finally have the "vision" realised ;)?
 
It's Reggie. He has always used ridiculous analogies constructed to fool the most uninformed mainstream listener. As much as I like the guy's personality, he's a serious bullshit artist as a PR man. (Even by PR standards.)

Btw, I can even see some of the logic behind the smartphone system. It doesn't excuse lack of built-in OS features like voice chat. But "flow" Nintendo intends sounds something like this:

1. Your phone is always on you. Nintendo Network app is always online.

2. You leave the house, grab the switch, and put it in a bag.

3. Friend messages, matchmaking, and text / voice chat continues without having to turn the Switch on, thanks to the phone.

4. When you're ready to play a game, you pull out the Switch, wake it, and you're already in a party or lobby, already in matchmaking, etc.

5. Finish game, sleep the Switch, go on your way, and the social / chat side of things isn't interrupted.

There's some good stuff here, given how common smartphones are today. And how people are used to always being in contact with friends on the phone. It's similar to what other companies have been deploying, such as Smartglass.

The only problem is that when using the Switch in a more traditional way, such as in console mode at home, having the phone by you with headphones plugged in for game chat isn't natural. Here is where the system either needs speaker chat - like the PS4 camera mic - or a headphone jack in the pro controller. This is where Nintendo has done things badly.

So the idea is to save battery life by splitting what you would like to do on a single device into multiple and wasting their battery instead huh? Genius ;).
 
I genuinely thought this was just miscommunication till I read the Reggie comments.

Smartphone batteries are bad enough without needing it for this shit. 🙈


So the app is free with a subscription? Why does the title say paid?

A subscription costs money.
 
With the Switch having a new and improved online, will we finally be getting proper online accounts? With digital games tied to the account rather than the console?
 
I genuinely thought this was just miscommunication till I read the Reggie comments.

Smartphone batteries are bad enough without needing it for this shit. 🙈




And subscription costs money.

This is from the company that created friend codes. They probably float ideas with business goals that override consumer convenience, ignoring that they need to go hand in hand to work. It'll be so insulting to the customer who are used to the simplicity of XBL/PSN, that they'll be put off by anything else Nintendo try to offer. Thier tolerance will be extremely thin. This is just unbelievable.

With the Switch having a new and improved online, will we finally be getting proper online accounts? With digital games tied to the account rather than the console?

They've shown they have no idea how to implement competent online services, I would keep expectations low based on thier history.
 
A subscription costs money.

Also the information that it came with the subscription was later found in the thread which I promptly edited my OP to place at the very top bolded. Nintendo's communication has been a mess and when you say there will be a free limited version of an app, that usually means the full version costs money and in this case that means with the subscription.

But sure, yeah I was going for click bait.
 
Has there been an explanation as to how we're supposed to hear the game and voice at the same time using this app?
Use a mono headset or only put 1 of 2 earbuds in? Same as using a headset on PS4, Xbox One, or Wii U.
except those systems you can just conveniently plug into the controller
 
Hi, this has surely been answered in this long thread, if anyone could answer my one question quickly, that would be much appreciated:

So it's to have "voice chat on the go", but ... you can't go online with the Switch on the go anyway, right? Wi-Fi only I thought?
 
Hi, this has surely been answered in this long thread, if anyone could answer my one question quickly, that would be much appreciated:

So it's to have "voice chat on the go", but ... you can't go online with the Switch on the go anyway, right? Wi-Fi only I thought?

well tether it to your smartphone I suppose


They want you to use it for everything else it seems
 
Is it known yet if stuff like messaging, inviting to a lobby and voice chat can also be done straight from the console?

If this is the case then I'm not mad anymore and will be paying for their subscription service. The added mobile app would actually be a nice addition in that case. If the mobile option is the only way to do this stuff then fuuuuuck that.

Gonna need to get some Bluetooth headphones!
 
Okay, say the app unlocks features with the subscription? how many people in one household are allowed to download the (paid for) app. And will they have to pay for each download?
 
Would it be possible for a device like a Switch to connect to a smartphone by Bluetooth and then have an app send it data to enable online play anywhere? Or is that restricted to the built in tethering options?
 
Or if your phone isn't iOS or Android based.
Yeah, I use a non-Android based Blackberry, and I'm not holding my breath here.
Has there been an explanation as to how we're supposed to hear the game and voice at the same time using this app?
I'm only guessing, but for on-tv I'd wager chat audio would all just come through the tv or home system speakers. I just don't get how it would work otherwise. I you have a phone headset in it would deafen the sound from the game (I really doubt game audio would come from smartphone app), but they wouldn't expect you to just lay your phone next to you and for you to shout into it, would they?

I mean that means that all sorts of background noise (from the game even) would go through as background noise in chat.

I really don't know. Nintendo did a ginormous shit job with this presentation with regards of actually letting potential customers what to expect.
 
This is a shit decision for consumers, but it doesn't affect me at all since I avoid voice chat. I would like to see a better option for those who use voice chat a lot, though.
 
Okay, say the app unlocks features with the subscription? how many people in one household are allowed to download the (paid for) app. And will they have to pay for each download?
That will depend on what they do with accounts and devices I guess. And I doubt the app needs to be purchased independently, I take "paid" as "part of the subscription". That would be even more stupid.

Would it be possible for a device like a Switch to connect to a smartphone by Bluetooth and then have an app send it data to enable online play anywhere? Or is that restricted to the built in tethering options?
I'm not sure why you'd need a Nintendo app for that. Might as well just use the built in tethering, I think there are Android apps that allow it too if your carrier sucks. I don't know about Apple products.
 
Okay, say the app unlocks features with the subscription? how many people in one household are allowed to download the (paid for) app. And will they have to pay for each download?

I think it's pretty obvious that you need an Nintendo account for this with a subscription. Everyone in a family can use this app with this account.

You don't need to pay for the app itself. It always free, but has limited functions when your Nintendo account has no online subscription.
 
So the idea is to save battery life by splitting what you would like to do on a single device into multiple and wasting their battery instead huh? Genius ;).

Wasting battery on your phone is not something Nintendo is worried about, most likely they're worried about battery and RAM usage, so it's likely they're making OS functionality light to save on those.
 
Wasting battery on your phone is not something Nintendo is worried about, most likely they're worried about battery and RAM usage, so it's likely they're making OS functionality light to save on those.

That, and it is a measure of built in security for protecting children. I know a lot of gaffers don't care about it, but there are a lot of parents that are probably pretty relieved the social features are gated somewhat. Online game chat is a wasteland.
 
I'm not sure why you'd need a Nintendo app for that. Might as well just use the built in tethering, I think there are Android apps that allow it too if your carrier sucks. I don't know about Apple products.
In the U.K., for most contracts you need to pay extra to use tethering. I just wondered if this could act as a workaround.
 
That, and it is a measure of built in security for protecting children. I know a lot of gaffers don't care about it, but there are a lot of parents that are probably pretty relieved the social features are gated somewhat. Online game chat is a wasteland.
Like it could be gated by... parental control settings ? And Nintendo might not be bothered with my phone's battery but I am lol.
What world am I in where this is acceptable as the only form of voice chat on a console in 2017. For multiplayer you make people pay for no less.

In the U.K., for most contracts you need to pay extra to use tethering. I just wondered if this could act as a workaround.
Yeah I know some countries are shit with that kind of thing. Well like I said I'm pretty sure there are apps that do this on Android regardless of your carrier, so yeah the Nintendo app could probably technically do it too.
 
Interesting. I don't think I know anybody who doesn't have a smartphone. Even my 84 year old grandma has one (carrier forced her to move to a smartphone). Unless you're like 8 or something.

You'd be surprised at how many people don't own a smartphone. I see it all the time in my job. Companies still do make cheap £20 non-smartphones and they still sell.
 
That, and it is a measure of built in security for protecting children. I know a lot of gaffers don't care about it, but there are a lot of parents that are probably pretty relieved the social features are gated somewhat. Online game chat is a wasteland.
20170113_051639_thumb.png


I'm going to keep calling this out every time I see it. They just showed off their Parental Controls app in a smartly produced ad. There is no reason to add another gate on top of that when onboard voice chat could easily be managed from the very app they showed.
well why? I dont want to be rude but nintendo can safely assume that most of the customers have a smartphone and thus using the second device is actually really clever
Using it might be clever. Requiring it would not be.
 
Top Bottom