They do understand marketing, and they do understand how to run a business. Their company has only existed for like 130 years. You have to know something to exist that long. The problem he’s getting at but didn’t convey right there is the corporate culture at Nintendo is honestly somewhat toxic. All the high positions of power are filled by 65+ year old business suits who have been here even before Nintendo became a game maker. And as such are coming from a totally different perspective then the 40 years old and younger people in the company that know them as a game maker first. This creates a lot of tension up top, especially considering these aren’t any old business suits, these are Kyoto business suits. The strictest, and “oldest school” of them all. They aren’t comfortable with adopting new ideas right away. Never have been never will be. Thankfully we’ve seen strides to introduce fresh blood into the company on a large scale. Splatoon was developed by a younger team. Odyssey was developed mostly by a younger team. ARMS. Younger guys. Xenoblade? Monolith employs guys straight outta college. The current president of Nintendo is a guy who grew up with the stuff. The problem is that as new people are pouring in, the older crowd isn’t. They’re very hesitant to step away and leave their corporate empire in the hands of “children” who would ruin what they made. Anyways to reiterate. Nintendo is a business that knows how to sustain itself. However, they have trouble evolving.
"Nintendo does not get online. Nintendo's the guy who's still using Internet Explorer, you know what I'm sayin'? They're still over there using Ask Jeeves." -dunkey, 2015
The existence of PC multiplayer games invalidates any excuse anyone has for paid online. It's existed, and continues to exist, for free, no strings attached.
ColdTiger77 I think it’s good right now tbh. 20 bucks for a year and you get nes and maybe even snes games (In the future) plus it makes hacking and smurfing pretty hard to do unless you have some money to throw around.
@@stakefr0mjatefarmvods534 this is only true while the game is bringing in profits. Basically servers for a game to play it online are paid by the income said game makes. Be it the base cost of the game or any other income made by extra content said game may have. You can't expect a company to go into losses to provide online connectivity. Many older games still have online play thanks to people that put up their own servers due to the love they have for those games.
@@jucedogi Servers cost basically nothing to run unless it's an MMO. Unless literally no one is playing the game, they're not operating at a loss, and I'd they are, it's a miniscule loss.
@@stakefr0mjatefarmvods534 server cost is relative to various variables and while true MMO's cost more others do cost also. Independent of this no company is obligated to run them at a loss.
A fan is not afraid to criticise their favorite company. A fanboy constantly claps and barks their praises like a seal with a chromosome deficiency. Thank you for being a true fan, Arlo.
What really bugs me, though - they delayed it for a year and it’s basically the same thing as when they announced it. It’s like they decided to do nothing for an entire year and just launched what they were going to launch a year ago. I have to wonder where all of the man hours went.
We are paying 20 Dollars for...peer to peer connection, some 30 year old games, cloud saves for a select few titles, and special offers they won’t even explain?
Blue Squid ah I was expecting someone to bring up the flimsy “well then how u have da switch!!1!”. First of all, my parents gave it to me and after you save up for something it’s pretty dumb to have to pay even more for it. Second of all, it’s not the money, it’s the fact that it’s just so inconvenient. I have already purchased a 60 dollar game, why should I need another 20 dollars to make the most of it? Nintendo’s service isn’t even worth 20 bucks, the features suck. Like I said, it’s paying for something that was free for almost 4 consoles in a row, cloud saves on certain titles, some 30 year old games and crappy special offers they haven’t explained.
@GAS It might be an obvious cash grab but honestly, the low price of it means nothing. Also, the toxicity was uncalled for, which goes to show your maturity. @SuperCullen004 I do understand that the Nintendo Switch Online sucks. A lot. However, $20 really isn’t that much. The process of having to setup the payment is rather inconvenient, but once you do so, you’re all good to go.
Blue Squid I suppose. I just hope that they fix it. We need to get more dlc for splatoon and mk8 deluxe etc. through the services via offers as well as a bigger game library and server upgrades. Then I’d be all for it. But that’s just my opinion.
Vienna The Grill its $3.99 a month the $20 is for a year subscription. U pay it to play Switch games online with other players and also to get NES games to play. That’s why
If you only care about online play it really isnt worth it, after all it uses peer to peer connection. Which means they're charging you (or the other depending who gets to be the host) to use your own internet.
Companies you love are not free from criticism. We're putting food on their plates, they should at least consider our opinion if they don't want to lose customers. Solutions: Servers across the board, at least with games it makes sense. (Looking at you Splatoon!) More than just NES games or the confirmation that SNES/N64 games will come sometime in the future, as someone who's too young to have grown up with the NES, I feel the games just don't hold up to modern or even SNES games. I don't have nostalgia for them, so I'm just kinda left with clunky, archaic shells of the games I actually like (Like Super Mario World or Super Metroid or even N64/Gamecube games) The ability to back our save files to SD cards, I understand not wanting fans to backup their Pokemon file. We don't want a thousand perfect IV, Shiny, level 100 Pokemon being cloned left and right. If you could backup your Pokemon file, I'm certain at least a few fans would figure out how to abuse the system. But Splatoon? Yeah, I guess people could undo losses in ranked matches IF they learned to abuse the system, but if Nintendo had SERVERS also saving your data as you played online matches, they could detect inconsistencies between the local and server data, and potentially ban players trying to abuse the system multiple times, or just backup the file from their own server whenever you tried to abuse it, I mean: You're online anyway, the file should be backed up after EVERY match. Meaning, after EVERY loss, so you wouldn't be able to have a pre-loss save data floating around in the Cloud. Switch online exclusive eShop sales. Not big ones, just like, three games a month? I mean, I already own most big games on Switch anyway. But this would be a good incentive for people who just bought their Switch, but can't afford those big Nintendo first party prices right off the back. They see, "Oh, I can get Breath of the Wild for twenty dollars off If I pay twenty dollars for a year of online membership!? Hot Dog!" Breath of the Wild is already a year and a half old game, Nintendo should have no problem discounting the game and a few others for to get newcomers on board with a Switch online membership. And for the love of all things cute and fluffy. Get rid of the smartphone App. Nintendo, when other companies look at you--They're not laughing because of a joke you made, they're laughing because you look like a Grandpa trying to act like his best understanding of a modern day teenager. Fortnite proved you can have in console voice chat, there's no technical limitations preventing you from doing so. Just, make voice chat from your console an OPTION so people can chose to do it or not. I couldn't care less about voice chat, but many people do. It's not impossible, so just get rid of the controversy and do it. Anyway, knowing Nintendo will never read this comment. I at least, enjoy sharing my opinion within the Arlo community.
Pokemon doesn't even matter IMO. As long as you aren't making something stupid like pure power Regigigas or so I really could care less if someone just wants something that is sort of able to be gotten in game. The idea of IVs are stupid anyway.
actually the reason SD saves aren't a thing is that that's how the wii got hacked, people could import bogus save data that allowed you to crash the system and load unsigned code
Likewise, you are not owed a product or service exactly to your desires just because you like a company. If you don't like their good or service you can get a good or service from somewhere else, but the company you like isn't obligated to make the thing you want. (They might be dumb not to if it loses them money, but that's their choice) Gamer entitlement is gross.
Clint The idea behind IVs is that every Pokémon is unique. It’s like Pokémon DNA. I do have a problem with people cloning and spawning shinies and competitive Pokémon. Time is a major factor in competitive, and the players who follow the official rules (Looking at 4.1!) and play legit are at a disadvantage. People who hack acknowledge this. Real world athletes spend their off season practicing. Esports players spend thousands of hours practicing in their chosen games. There is no reason to complain about spending a week breeding Pokémon - especially with how every generation it gets easier and faster - to be involved in competitive Pokémon. As for shinies, it’s the concept of supply and demand. Everyone wants a shiny. High demand. But generally only one in four thousand encounters is a shiny. Low supply. Thus, shinies are valuable, and can be used as bargaining chips in trades. When you can spawn shinies out of nothing at the drop of a hat, you’re flooding the market with fakes. Counterfeits. Thereby reducing the overall value of shinies because demand is reduced.
The easy solution to the Pokémon issue is to require saves before and after online interactions, just like they did in DPPt. That way, trades and battles cannot be undone because they immediately overwrite the cloud save.
Yeah...I just noticed that... Also, Arlo stole Zack Scott footage. *I think I’m gonna regret that comment* *Now if you excuse me I’m gonna go back to playing Mega Man until 11 comes out you take care.*
Ron? Making a joke.... or just pointing out something that is supposed to be a joke. But then again, to get said joke you’d have to have play paper Mario, a video game. Ron plays video games??
As a competitive Splatoon player, I can confirm this online service is pretty crap. Especially during the recent splatfest, couldn't get through a single game without disconnecting. Every splatfest has been like that, but now we're paying for it. C'mon Nintendo
I agree with all of this. Most RUclipsrs on the subject just hop on one side and beat it to death. You gave the pros and cons in a much more honest way, so thank you for that
babyMilkDud no, they’re saying Arlo is very positive when it comes to nintendo and rarely criticizes them. So when Arlo says he doesnt like something, you know that something is really bad
But he still bought it. If you feel very passionate about an issue, don’t buy it! I haven’t gotten the online service (and I won’t until Mario Maker switch) but Nintendo won’t watch this video, but they see his 35 dollars (family plan)
The cheat claim Nintendo claims is that by being able to back up your save, you can back up your rank, so if you lose your rank, you can just reload the save, boom, get your rank back. You know how other games combat that? Dedicated server and your rank is stored on the server instead of locally... Edit: Basically, Nintendo is inventing a problem that doesn't exist, if you just do things right in the first place.
I think they’ll use the money from online to fix this issue personally. This whole Splatoween event was funded with the assumption they’d make the money back from paid online. The money we’re paying for online isn’t necessarily going towards the online itself, but they’ve already done something in their biggest online game they wouldn’t have done otherwise because of the price. People expect Nintendo to use the money how most /other/ companies would use the money, but I know the reason I /like/ Nintendo is that they’re different, so I get really tired by /both/ people acting like Nintendo can do no wrong /and/ people who act like Nintendo is the most idiotic and backwards company in existence.
Well I mean they can be. The other companies do things that they do for a reason. Nintendo tries their hardest to make their own path, which works sometimes. But something as important as online? That's just not to be trifled with. The most optimal way to host it will be the most optimal way. P2P just plain sucks, and nintendo may not even fix that. I don't even know anymore.
This is how people are cheating in Splatoon currently though! They just use a save editor to change literally anything they want to from rank to getting unreleased weapons. How do you fix this problem? Dedicated servers.....
This is how people are cheating in Splatoon currently though! They just use a save editor to change literally anything they want to from rank to getting unreleased weapons. How do you fix this problem? Dedicated servers.....
I don't think you know what you're talking about. Mario Tennis Aces uses Peer to Peer for actual gameplay while keeping all the important information on the servers. I honestly think they'll probably rework Splatoon 2 to do something similar now, and then make it so we can use Cloud Saves with the game. Also, Splatoon 2 already /does/ keep all your information and stats on servers, otherwise you wouldn't be able to see it in the mobile app, they just treat your local save file as the most accurate source, which isn't necessarily best practice, but if they had a fully locked down system it wouldn't be a problem, and seeing as Cloud Saves weren't originally part of the online service it's not hard to see why the game wouldn't have been developed like that in the first place. Plus, there's a lot of stuff you can do while offline that can change stuff once you /do/ finally connect to the internet, which means it would be easier and less likely to cause issues if you just treat the local save as the most trustworthy source, and it would mean some major changes to what's possible while offline in the game if they /do/ change it to allow for cloud saves and the such.
I just got a switch, it's my first Nintendo console. I was under the impression that they wouldn't be the type to be like "oh hey you got your parents to buy you a switch for Christmas congrats little guy, awwww. Now get them to pay more money so you can use the online service, even though they already bought you the 1. System 2. The game 3. The actual internet bill 4. The router and modem 5. The electricity in your house So you own everything you need to play online. Except for our artificial wall we put up, and it's only purpose is for you to pay us $20 more god damned dollars. Fuck me.
@@Smoothsmoothie They didn't buy any of that for me because I live alone and pay for it all myself, lmfao. My point was that my impression based off little to no prior knowledge was that they didn't do things like that so that kids could get a switch without parents finding reasons to turn them down. Such as finding out about a subscription fee. Bruh I'm 22 and when my sub runs out on switch I essentially go "ah... wow that sucks... I guess I can't play anything until I find it worth putting more money in this just to play it." Now imagine a kids mom telling them "didn't I just pay *insert amount here* like last week." A month or so ago I actually bought MH GU and like the fucktard I am I forgot I didn't have a subscription... I haven't played MH GU since I bought it because I don't feel like paying more lmao.
What pisses me off the most about this (and I'm sure many other fans) is that Nintendo delayed this for a long time in order to work on it more so that they can give fans a quality online subscription service....................................................................... and then this is what they throw at us. A whole year later.
Really makes you question what exactly was being "worked on" this whole time that warranted a whole year's delay. A NES emulator and a cloud save system combined couldn't have possibly taken any more than a month to develop for a company like Nintendo, and nothing has changed about online multiplayer.
They seemed to plan it right before the release of Mario party too one of their biggest games... Like they couldn't handle the amount of ppl that r gonna be on it lol
nintendo is ridiculous, I would have purchased the switch a long time ago if they would give us what we want, they could make the switch an incredible system if they would release much more than they have.
The reason the cloud saves don't lead to cheating on other platforms is because your online rank, items, status / progress are tied to your ACCOUNT, and not your save data. So the issue here does not lie in cloud saves, but nintendo's caveman online still using friend codes and not having a real Nintendo ID system for their online gaming where that ID saves your status rather than your saves
I was about to type that as well, but then I remembered something: Splatoon has offline singleplayer modes and I'm 99% sure you can unlock cosmetics in it. A game like Summoners War or Warframe, you literally cannot turn the game on without an internet connection, and that's fine, your stuff is tied to your account. In Splatoon it's possible to have multiplayer items tied to offline singleplayer progression. I'm sure there is a solution and Nintendo is just too lazy to think of it, but it's not 100% cut-and-dry like you imply it is. It's only like,,, 80% cut-and-dry
@@aavocadont you can still play the game you paid for. Not having internet doesnt suddenly disable your games. You can still play games like fortnite, which would be useless without internet, without paying for the service. Cry harder.
Nintendo: Does a Switch Online. Everyone else: You became the very thing you swore to destroy. Edit: The Switch Online Service makes me want to buy a Wii U just to play Splatoon again.
Agreed. Switch Online is a sham and even worse, a huge missed oppertunity. I'd happily pay the 20 euros for a decent online service for the switch. But paying that money for an online system that would've been considered barebones 10 years ago, a shitty p2p online gaming infrastructure that is iffy at best and a couple of NES games as a pittance to replace the Virtual Console? No. 20 euro's isn't a lot of money on a yearly basis but that's a no on principle. I just hope more people do the same, giving Nintendo a signal that they should be doing better than this.
Xbox has had support for voice chatting through their console since 2002, and you could actually send messages to your friends through their system. Basic features that still seem to elude Nintendo. Steam had the same features upon launch in 2004. In 2008, Sony updated the Playstation 3 with trophies. All features Nintendo have refused to incorporate into their online to this day. Barebones 10 years ago is putting it mildly. Not defending the precedent Microsoft has set with holding their online play hostage for such a hefty price (in fact I dislike the consequences it has had), but Nintendo doesn't get a pass from me launching a service like this in 2018. Regardless of the price.
Steam doesn't run any of the servers or backend stuff for online multiplayer games they sell, except for games they themselves make. The same is true for Xbox, PS4, and Switch. It is also true that neither Microsoft, Sony, or Nintendo give a damn cent towards third party companies hosting fees. (and if the game is P2P, then all that is moot anyways)
Interesting point here is that Nintendo develops a fair amount of online games the service is required for, especially (at least as far as I'm aware) compared to the PS4/Xbox, so if Nintendo happens to decide improving internet quality (adding servers to Splatoon, improving netcode for many other games) is a good idea, we may end up effectively paying less for more compared to Xbox/PS4. Just in case it isn't clear, I say "effectively" because they could've decided to do that without having paid online, but it's still a part of the online service so I'm counting it as what we pay for.
I know. Technically, Sony and Microsoft are just taking money away from you. They dont even host servers for fuck all. It is sad that they charge you $60 a year just to fucking play online. they don't even host any god damn servers. I switched to PC a few years ago and loved it. And I bought a switch. Both 10/10 purchases.
This makes more work for Nintendo in comparison to Sony or Microsoft. Microsoft only has Halo and Forza. Sony doesn't produce any of the games they own themselves, they just buy exclusive rights or buy out the studios that make the games. Nintendo makes a vast majority of its games so it has to support most of the servers itself. So picking and choosing makes sense for Nintendo, not choosing arms makes sense. Not choosing Splatoon makes zero sense since its the largest online game.
The fact console players defend it shows a lack of understanding of games and servers. The fact you would let sony, Microsoft, and NINTENDO gate keep your internet and u give them money for it lmao
@Nathan Trinh Connects a switch to a custom server to essentially turn the lan play mode of some games into online mode. It's free and works on any banned switches.
I play Splatoon Online, we don't have dedicated servers, we don't have save files, we don't have voice chat and we don't have Anti-cheat... So WHAT AM I PAYING FOR?????
Firenze 64 its not a problem, if you work every day of the year for 10 hours a day then you need less than a wage of half a cent per hour to afford online. that is 2 times less than xbox and 3 times less than ps and if you cant afford 20 a year then you shoulnt even have a switch
For a hypothetical Virtual Console service, Nintendo should make this the DEFINITIVE Nintendo console that can play NES, Game Boy, SNES, N64, Game Boy Color, GameCube, Game Boy Advance, Wii, Nintendo DS, Nintendo 3DS, and Wii U games.
Wii U would be a stretch on the Switch. I imagine they'd have to port the games to get that functionality, I don't think there's enough juice to emulate a Wii U on the Switch.
Ok, 3DS and Wii U games are a bit extreme here. 3DS is still selling, and Wii U was literally the previous console. Maybe up until the Gamecube games. Or even Wii, but that's stretching it a bit.
I need Iwata to get out of his grave become buff , and walk into the Nintendo headquarters with the fist of the north star theme playing. so I'm just gonna write what I'm envisioning . *Iwata was reborn the moment Nintendo online came to be , he was filled with rage and strengthened by it .* he walked into the Nintendo headquarters in japan and faced off with the current president Shuntaro Furukawa. Iwata pointed at him and said , " what have you done this isn't a business Nintendo's a family that strives for quality and being friendly to the consumer ." Shuntaro sitting in his business chair with his feet up on his desk said , " HA , your an idiot Iwata , with this i can make more money then you could ever imagine." Iwata charges at Shutaro and slams his face onto the table repeatedly while saying , " you don't even play games your not a developer , why were you placed in this industry , why did they make you a successor, what games have you even played." Shuntaro resist being slammed down , shoved Iwata off, and unbutton his suit while saying ," first of all i played Pac-man , and second the way you were leading this company was driving it to the ground , testing products so they wouldn't break when dropped ,free online , it was all a risk that we shouldn't have taken." Shuntaro gripped Iwata's arm and did a judo style over shoulder throw sending Iwata out of the window. Iwata's grip remained fixed to the exposed flooring , and he was stuck dangling off the edge. Iwata still holding on said , "We do not run from risk. We run to it. We were taking the risk to move beyond the boundaries of the game industry to reach new players and current players. but all you are doing is alienating the work of your predecessors, your fan base and ruining our image for money." Iwata pulled himself up and nailed Shuntaro with a Knee of justice . Iwata then loosened his tie and said ," Look Shuntaro , while I might not have understood the best business practices , it was through quality ,faith,and helping our supporters that this company could carry on but now with your greed , I'm not sure what i can do to fix it , but what i know is ... I WILL STOP YOU...... fa--lcon ... PUNCH." ten out of ten shit post I'm gonna go watch some TV now
I legitimately put down Splatoon 2 and turned on the Wii U yet again because it’s free and- get ready for this- it’s not bad at all. I think a lot of other people did the same too because the lobbies are still relatively crowded and I have not had trouble getting in a game in 2019.
@@AncelDeLambert I mean, if it's a gold brick, it's not a scam. And hey, maybe the box is made with fine materials and has silver thread and stuff. If I paid $20 for that, I'd be very happy with it. Not talking about Nintendo here, just saying a gold brick in a silver box is worth more then $20.
The best way to look at Switch Online is comparing what you had available to you six months ago (for free) with what the $20 nets you now. Switch Online grants you: - online multiplayer (something that was free before) - the renting of NES games (which many people already own on Wii/3DS/Wii U/etc and/or have played countless times before- Sony and Microsoft on the other hand give you games that aren't decades old, some of which you probably haven't played) - the privilege of purchasing exclusive accessories (is this a joke?) - cloud saves (which aren't as good as backing up your own data offline and many of the games you'd want backed up, like Pokemon and most likely Smash, don't allow it) Honestly, when custom firmware and piracy solve a lot of your consumers' issues it should be obvious that you made a terrible service.
@@offradar31 yeah but not because you want to but more because you hacked your console in order to do so. But that's the next problem: They don't allow cloud saves for splatoon 2 because of "cheating" but if a cheater really wants to do so, they have the ability to regardless backup their save because the switch is already hacked... What I would expect them to do is to put all multiplayer-related save part on the servers only (which they btw actually have, but the servers are ONLY used for matchmaking, after you've found all 7 other players, it basically just leaves you and the other Players alone)
Nobody that has a sound mind would make people pay $60 bucks for a game then make them pay for a service that another company is basically not charging people on the PC.....I mean a lot of people these days have a PC why PAY for it when you could bypass it all together? Like for example my friend plays Fortnite on a PC not on any of the consoles he said he'd never buy digital games on a PC or play any multiplayer games on any console because it'll cost him extra money. The guy is not cool with his money he knows how to save it.
Paying for peer-to-peer is the same as paying for LAN. You have the switch, which you payed for, and the connection, which you payed for, and now Nintendo wants to tax you for the ability to plug into another device.
I keep hearing that "maybe they're working on improving the service right now!" or "they will make it better eventually" but you'd think that they'd have done that with the almost 2 years the Swtich has been out. And during that time, they gave that same service for free... Otherwise why would it be free for this long if they weren't "getting it ready" to use? Did it really take that long to just add the NES Online and cloud save features? I really hope those arguments are right and that they make it better with time. But my point is that the service should've been "ready" with all its features (at least the basic ones, such as dedicated servers) for its release date. That's my opinion. Nice video! :D
For a second I read at the end "I hope these [defensive] arguments get better over time" like it was a comeback. I must be tired. But yeah. It really doesn't they actually did anything over the 1-year delay to improve the service. It's confusing.
Dai Nu, exactly. Calling dedicated servers a basic function (which could potentially be as complex as recoding massive portions of their games, in addition to the licensing, installation, building actual structures to HOUSE the servers in) is like saying turning a 2 lane highway into a 6 lane highway with an under and overpass is easy. And yeah, I distinctly remember matches of halo 4 from the xbox 360 days being at least partially peer to peer. I remember the host leaving, and it rotating to find another one. (which is something nintendo DOES need to do better, coding in what to do when the host leaves/disconnects)
Not saying that it's easy... That's why I said they had almost two years to make something happen, at least for the games that would really benefit from it such as Splatoon 2 and HOPEFULLY Smash Ultimate when it comes out. And then again, I did say basic features, plural... Not exclusively dedicated servers. There's the save data backup thing. They could've made it so you can transfer it to an SD card or USB. But no, they didn't... They took away something that used to be there and even for FREE. It's easy to feel like now we have to pay for NOTHING to be better, like Arlo said.
This is also really gona kill games like Mario Tennis Aces and ARMS with them being 60 dollar games. At least Splatoon 2 has a meaty enough single player to sink our teeth into along with some tasty DLC on the side, but ARMS and Mario Tennis have really shallow single player campaigns so multiplayer is their main focus. As a result Nintendo made it so those games actually cost 80 dollars for the full experience.
Quite possible. On a side note, it can also turn off people buying those games in the first place. If the online play was always going to be free on the Switch, I probably would have bought Splatoon 2 and ARMS when they were released, earning Nintendo £120 from me. Instead, I didn't want to risk buying either, just in case the online was the only thing that I found fun about them, earning NIntendo £0 from me.
Said it before, I'll say it agian. Vote with your wallet people. Nintendo is offering you a completely hallow online subscription with broken features and peer-to-peer connections. Dont pay for the service and avoid games that require it for online play. Once the game devs put pressure on them, they will at the very least have to improve the quality of the service.
Matthew Keys If you bought a console for just one game, you made a really poor purchase. Learn some patience, and ensure that the system you will buy will for sure have multiple games you want to play.
@LordSpleach I jumped on Xbox Live when it released in 2002 and it was wild. I remember they had these really trippy voice modifications people could use to mask their identity (one made you sound robotic, one made your voice deeper, etc) but they were so obnoxious Microsoft got rid of them. MechAssault and Unreal Championship were the main titles worth playing online before Halo 2 came out (There was a way to jerry-rig Halo CE to play online through a service called Xbox Connect, but it was janky). For voice chat, Microsoft came out with an adapter that plugged into the memory slot of the controller and had a headphone jack (something Nintendo should do for the Switch Pro Controller). I bought a 3rd party add on that slotted in so my guest accounts could also do voice chat. The service was great, but at first I had a ton of trouble connecting with one of my friends (had to call customer support in India constantly). That first year was really special - All of a sudden I had friends from New York and Germany, and some 50-year old guy from Florida joined my MechAssault forum. Even though they stopped releasing good exclusives, I've been on Xbox Live ever since.
I was a Rank S+ on ALL Splatoon 2 Ranked modes... really proud of managing over 250 hours of gameplay on-par with my actual full time job. Switch Online came, and I gave them the finger. Sure IT HURTS not to play my beloved favorite game, but letting Nintendo pull off an "EA" on my ass...? No thanks.
Buddy it's 20 bucks. Yeah it's a bitch to pay for online, but at least you'll be able to play your favourite game for a year. (and you get to play some rad ass nes games so I guess that's a plus)
I’m protesting purchasing this service until they fix it or at least take some form of public action about it. I’d rather go without online than have my arm twisted into paying for a crappy service because “it’s only $20!”.
Unfortunately, so many people are giving in that Nintendo is already profiting off this service a lot. So the only thing I’m betting on is if they want more people to buy it is to make it less of a scam, but then they would have to put actual effort into it.
Cool...but refusing to purchase a product because it isn't of good enough quality isn't a form of protest. It's called being an informed consumer. Framing it as 'protest' just smacks of entitlement. Nintendo doesn't owe you anything. You don't owe Nintendo anything. They haven't wronged you or anyone in any way. A 'protest' implies Nintendo has done a social or personal wrong that must be rectified if they are to be a part of society and do business (you know, like segregation boycotts in the 1960's)
David Stinnett I am protesting this shitty service, and the bad business practice of expecting your customers to bend over and take whatever you give them out of brand loyalty. What you seem to be talking about is a boycott, and I never claimed to be engaging in that type of protest. But yes, you could call it “voting with your wallet” if you’d rather. Either way, I’m refusing to purchase in an attempt to send a message about their business practices. Sounds like a protest to me.
@@justrightgaming3333 And what's most infuriating (for me) is that Splatoon is easily Nintendo's most hardcore competive online game. It requires actual skill. This is the one game that needs servers and voice chat.
Here's my problem. I have no problem with paying for online for games when it's just a side feature. What I have a problem with is paying for online for games that revolve entirely around online. Splatoon's main mode is all about going online. Which means that I'll be paying $20 a year just to play the game I already paid $60 for. Sure, it has a single player mode, but when I've finished it, there will be nothing left to do if I don't fork up the cash.
Agreed. You shouldn't have to pay to be able to play a game you already paid for. The same reason I hate the new n64 emulator because not only do you have to play for Nintendo online you have to pay for the extension just to play the 2 or 3 games you want to play. I ain't doing that shit. I'd rather buy a wii u just to play n64 games.
To all those saying that it doesn't matter because Sony and Microsoft have $60 services: If someone is selling a hot dog for 10 dollars, and someone else was selling a piece of crap shaped like a hot dog for 10 cents, I'd just go hungry.
I was really looking forward to playing smash ultimate online and going competitive with it. Now it seems pretty much impossible for me since this service is shit. Oh god the smash 4 online days are coming back. I have the money, and I got 20 bucks specifically for this, but I'm not buying anything right now.
At least Sony and Microsoft have monthly games with the membership. I don't expect Nintendo to be like Sony and have monthly games be over £100 for free but they could give a decent game or even an old ds game like Lego battles, something that used local play they can now make it fully online like Mario party ds or Plants Vs Zombies.
In 2016 he became popular for criticising Nintendo on games like Colour Splash. His videos on Colour Splash, in particular, gained a lot of attention and he was one of the most popular fans to criticise the game.
Nintendo Switch Online just killed Splatoons 2. I just tried to play an online match and it wouldn't let me play just because I don't have a membership. Nintendo Switch Online just killed the most popular mode in Splatoon 2.
When they initially announced the service, and said there would be a back catalog of games on the service, I was ready to pay only $20/yr for it. As time went on, it never changed from just NES games. I was hoping to get some SNES games or GB or N64, but no, just a handful of NES games. I dont really play online anyway, so now I have absolutely zero reason to pay for it.
I laughed out loud at NES games...would have been impressive for free on DS. N64 games would have been impressive for free on 3DS... But Switch? We should be wondering what GameCube and Wii games we will be getting included with our sub.
I don't think they could have done that part in a more disappointing way. "Here's 20 NES games, but you get 3 more a month; nothing else though."... What a joke.
To be fair, the 3DS can't handle emulating the Nintendo 64. So N64 games for free would have been impressive on the Wii U. And we're not getting GameCube or Wii games on the Switch unless they're straight ports.
They're were left 35k dislikes on their ad for it so yeah Nintendo is being Nintendo. I didn't buy their shitty cardboard just for a game, and I won't buy a shitty online service just for a small por th in of the virtual console and a feature that should be free. With Net Neutrality going away slowly, this is getting absurd that gamers have to pay for internet at least 3 times just to play their games online.
It's not "if the customer is willing to pay". The fact that so many games REQUIRE online to play in the first place (Destiny, Titanfall, etc.) and many games are mainly played online (COD, Battlefield, etc.) you're being forced to pay for a service that is well overpriced and under managed. Your soda Carls Jr example would make sense if they sold soda for $4 - $5, but it just isn't comparable. I highly advise you to look into the amount of work it takes to create and "upkeep" online servers. It's literally highway robbery when you compare it to the yearly fee. This is why nobody but Xbox charged at first for online, but because they set the precedent, others followed their footsteps for that easy cash.
Sony & Microsoft: Here’s this $60 game released only a few months ago for FREE for being a member! We do this every month! Nintendo: Here’s a bunch of 30-year old games that everyone and their mom has played a million times that have aged so badly in today’s climate, they hardly hold your attention! Don’t you dare expect GameCube games for free! Those are only 15 years old!
Calvin Bremer I’m so mad at Nintendo for this... like how much do they have to make off these old crappy games. It’s funny cause if they offered NES games on the N64 it would have been laughed at.... but now... uhhh nostalgia
I've long since given up hope of a virtual console. It seems like Nintendo aren't going to make individual titles available for purchase either. Out of all their classic titles there are maybe a handful I would actually want to purchase (and have multiple times) in the past. Super Metroid, Link to the Past, etc. etc. I've bought many of my favorites multiple times. But I'll be damned if I pay $20 just to access a bunch of NES titles I don't give a rat's ass about. This is the thing with Nintendo they like to bitch and moan about piracy and emulation. But they themselves are the ones who push people towards emulation because they can't be bothered to make their classics available. I am sorry but the mini systems don't cut it either. Your essentially given a bunch of roms (that's what they are) that Nintendo has selected. I want to choose the titles I buy. Hell the SNES mini classic doesn't have chrono trigger. It doesn't have DKC2 or DKC3 either. I've just downloaded the classics I want and play them on my PC. I did buy a SNES mini classic with the express purpose of loading it up with additional roms. I also put many of these games on my hacked Vita.
They do not give you $60 games for free, you still payed for that. Not to mention the amount of times they give that quality in their payed for service is rare. Honestly steam is the way to go for an online market. It's free for online and they have sales often.
I absolutely refuse to pay for Switch online. I don't even care. An ice cream truck can sell only empty ice cream cones and say "it's cheaper than ice cream", but... why are you selling empty ice cream cones? Ya know? I want ice cream, fam.
It's not just Steam that's free. Ubisoft has Uplay, EA has Origin, and Blizzard has Battle.net. IF EA CAN MAKE THEIR SERVICE FREE THEN NINTENDO HAS NO EXCUSE.
There also the fact that EA gave out free games once in a while just for being on Origin. Only bought The Sims 4 and I ended up with Dead Space, Theme Hospital, SimCity 2000, among others without paying a dime. The Consumerist’s worst company of the year in 2012 and 2013 is literally being more pro-consumer than Nintendo.
@@ChunkSchuldinga can we spread this thread to make sure the gaming community sees this and possibly nintendo? I honestly think your reply to my comment is a lot more well worded and presented than mine lmao
Nintendo isn't going to do anything about it as long as people keep paying for it. EA would easily charge if given the opportunity, but PC is an open platform and people would stop buying from them. If you actually want to see changes, then you need protest with your wallet instead of your mouth.
as the koreans say. 인정합니다. or i agree bc EA is a bumfuck stupid ass company and yet they ahve free internmet service bc YOU CAN'T RESTROICT THE INTERNET
Don’t buy it. Revolt against them. This is unacceptable. I refuse to pay for this. I can install retroarch and play all these nes games online for free.
Instinct Labs IMO Nintendo could have solved this one way. Put a headphone jack in the joycons and Pro Controller. It’s very difficult to play games like Fortnite without communicating with your fellow players and playing docked while having your headset plugged into your Switch is a mess. Support a headphone jack and Nintendo could even sell their own headsets which would make a lot more money and people would be more willing to pay and use it. Makes a lot more sense to me than a smartphone app
LOSTLEAD8R Uh yeah it is! One of the best things about Ps4 and Xbox is being able to easily talk and interact with friends and strangers. Sure Nintendo has attempted this but it should be through the console itself, not a flawed phone app with extremely limited features.
LOSTLEAD8R not a problem‽ LOLOLOLOL!! Maybe not for you, but for a LOT of people it is a problem! Sure, it’s a first-world problem and there are workarounds, but other companies have proven its possible, Nintendo just doesn’t want to do it.
People already have to pay for internet and the $300 console, plus the games. In the ads there are happy families playing the switch....bet their smiles will turn upside down when they see that they have to pay $35 freaking bucks to play online. Edit: thanks for the likes and replies!
Regarding how Splatoon 2 seems to have been shafted by NSO, my theory is that it's all trickle-down from poor initial game design decisions. The real crux of the problem with Splatoon 2 in particular is that everything in the game is clientside. There is no substantial server verification happening anywhere in the pipeline. All of your online stats and your gear are clientside, and from what I understand, as long as your Switch thinks it's valid, any other Switch in your online game will pass it off as valid, since it's all P2P. It's why hackers were able to play as Octolings early, or force people onto forbidden maps in online mode, or pull of crazy stunts like instantly turfing the entire stage with ink at the start of a Turf War. Never trusting the client is always Network Security 101. It was a flawed design from the beginning, and now ALL of Splatoon 2's netcode is structured around this. It would be wholly infeasible to rewrite it to a serverside architecture. Now, I don't know if the heart of this problem being at such odds with an online service stem from Splatoon 2's development predating the NSO design spec (bad, but understandable), or if the NSO spec was designed specifically to cater to this architecture (VERY bad), but if it's the former, then there was nothing NSO would have been able to do. Splat 2 *will not* ever support dedicated servers, because it was never designed to do so. That's just not something you roll out in an update, that's something you write a whole new sequel for. So I believe it could be the case that Splat 2 was sadly grandfathered out of the system. And regarding cloud saves, my bet is that Nintendo saw just how gapingly wide open Splat 2 has been blown that they explicitly denied it from the online save functionality because they don't want it to become an attack vector into their new service. I bet Splat 2 would support NSO cloud saves just fine, it's just quarantined out because it's so egregiously infected. The talk about wanting to curb hacking is likely a corporate coverup. That all said, I don't know for sure why LGPE is also out of the cloud save party. My guess? It was developed by GameFreak and Niantic, two companies that are quite excellent at a number of things they do, but are... admittedly lacking in other departments. Pokemon games have had a track record of dropping the ball with their networking services, and Niantic has been agonizingly dragging Pokemon Go through development hell since its release, with its poor stepbrother Ingress licking at the dirt in PoGo's boot treads for nourishment. Maybe they just weren't up to the task of implementing the feature? I really don't want that to be the reason... if some random Joe Indy can do it, you'd think AAA devs could... I guess I really don't know for sure.
Diamond Ice NS I think you hit it right on the head. Nintendo’s corporate culture of lifelong service and apprenticeship has prevented them from hiring outside experts in online play, leading to a bunch of mistakes with their net code that other companies already dealt with over a decade ago. I really think that unless Nintendo can become more flexible and hire outside help, these things won’t be fixed until their next console.
I think for Pokemon they're more afraid of people duping rare pokemon more than anything since it seems like it could be extremely easy to explot. As for Splatton 2, yeah that's a mess I doubt they'll fix.
Nintendo switch online and EA in a nutshell Gamers: Congrats Nintendo for the new feature Nintendo and EA: Hello i like Money Gamers: why did you choose to put this new feature on? EA and Nintendo: Money!
My Nintendo switch is starting to warp, and I am past my warranty. I have 300+ hours of Splatoon 2. Any day now my switch could just bite the dust, and I could lose everything. Thanks Nintendo.
@@dalemonshateu6948 look I know there are games that don't support cloud saving. But that's not really a big issue. Also switch online is not as bad as everyone makes it. Don't call me an idiot for being correct. Switch online is brand new. Just be patient because it will evolve. It's at it's starting point. Quality does not come instantly. Quality is something Nintendo works hard on and is also the reason why they don't announce loads of big games at once. Because they make sure there is quality. Switch online is a good thing. So stop complaining.
Sony and Microsoft give you 2 PS4/Xbox One games and 2 PS3 and Xbox 360 games a month while Nintendo gives you 20 35 year old games from a console no one really cares about these days
I'd hardly call it giving when you only get to play them as long as you have a sub active. It's also triple the price for the online and whether you already own the games they give out is another thing entirely. They gave Bloodborne out somewhat recently which was pretty neat, shame I owned it already so I didn't really get anything out of that month. Regardless about how you feel about the NES games, at least everyone gets something they wouldn't have otherwise.
@@SammyDrz Then again, the NES games you get for the switch are also only usable while you're paying for the service. They should just go ahead and throw SNES and N64 games into the mix, and I'm sure a lot of people would be more than grateful to pay the 20 bucks just for the sake of playing those games. Heck, I'd pay the 60 dollars just to able to play them, Nintendo is just sitting in a gold mine, apparently not knowing what to do with it. Or they're just greedy and are waiting to release mini versions of all consoles.
20 dollars IS A LOT OF MONEY FOR SOME PEOPLE. What about the kids that depend on their parents? what about the people on other countries where even a single game costs an absurd amount of money? I hate the "it's not a lot of money" argument, because it only considers adult people on USA
I admit that last one bit may be generalizing a little, but I think my point is clear: not everyone is in the same economic situation, because of their job, family, age or country. Should we really strip them out of the online experience when they can't pay it easily?
Water It’s only 20 dollars. If they were able to spend 300 on the console, then a small yearly fee isn’t going to hurt them. Also, Nintendo isn’t even forcing you to pay for online, you can still play single player no problem. You people are just spoiled.
nintendo can deal with online being free, just look at the past year... that shows that free online is not a problem at all and its just the company thinking of a way to squeeze more money out of the consumers
Of course they can. Peer to peer servers cost next to nothing to run. It's why indie games and small companies utilize them. It's dedicated servers that cost money to keep up, which somewhat justifies paying money, but we're not getting those. We're just paying $20 every single year to play the games we already paid for on the console we already paid for with the internet connection we already paid for.
+Damir Kalaz We are getting dedicated servers. For Smash, and Mario Kart. You know, the games that are popular. Not Splatoon. Get over it whiney bitch.
You mean, one game that doesn't necessarily need it and one that isn't even out yet? I don't know what you count as popular but Splatoon was in fact among some of the most popular and best sellers. *And is a shooter. Which could really use the servers instead.*
+Senderoth Trollinski No, we're not. Read the text during that part of the video. I understand if reading is difficult for you at the age I assume you to be based on this reply, but it's clearly stated that this was from awhile ago, and may have even just been Reggie talking hypothetically. It has not be stated one way or the other that these two games or any others will be getting dedicated servers. Sorry, is "hypothetically" too big of a word for you? Here, let me provide you with the definition just in case you don't know the URL to google: "by imagining a possibility rather than reality; as a hypothesis." And just in case "Imagining", "possibility", and "hypothesis" are also too big for you: Imagining: "form a mental image or concept of." Possibility: "a thing that may happen or be the case." Hypothesis: "a supposition or proposed explanation made on the basis of limited evidence as a starting point for further investigation." And just in case that last one throws you for a loop: Supposition: "an uncertain belief." Please actually pay attention and learn the facts before you decide to call someone a "whiny bitch". By the way, "whiny" doesn't have an e. Just pointing that out, because if you're going to insult someone, you should also at least spell it right, otherwise you're basically just insulting yourself. Furthermore, you're suggesting that there is nothing to complain about in the scenario where MK8D gets dedicated servers prioritized over Splatoon 2. Splatoon 2 is more heavily impacted by the lack of dedicated servers than MK8D is, so if MK8D got dedicated servers and Splatoon 2 stayed as is, that would almost be *more* infuriating. Ideally, *all* first party multiplayer Nintendo games would offer dedicated servers, but if it has to only be a few, then it should be games that rely on connection quality the most.
Yeah, I can say this service doesnt give me diddly. The price tag seems so attractive but then I asked 'what do I get for paying?' A better time online? More communication options? Wouldn't be hard to do. Or even a better, more reliable connection? Nope. They offer cloud saves that dont help the games I like. Namely splatoon 2. And nes games. Nes. Games. What? Sony and microsoft now somehow trump nintendo online in value because I will at least get relevant features. Just, how the heck after so many years does nintendo not have more roms to offer for emulation on their platform? $20 a year for access to everything gamecube and before would be pretty cool. A giant undertaking sure but that would get more value out of that old stock than piecemeal distribution of two to three remakes. The fact they haven't done something to that extent just hits me with the feeling nintendo is doing the bare minimum to appease consumers about an additional online fee, for their notoriously awful online that is somehow even worse than wii's online.
SantaFire ` don’t forget taking down Emu paradise and other rom sites, now we will never be able to play Game cube games that will never get a port or rereleased again, so it seems that game conservation should still be done based on those measures since Nintendo threw out most of the roms for space a while ago.
Dataminers and homebrewers proved a long time ago that it would be virtually zero effort on nintendo's part to put every nes, snes, and n64 game they have the rights to on either the virtual console or switch online. I can see both sides of the argument for and against a streaming service version of the VC, but the fact of the matter is either way there is no excuse.
As you pointed out despite the poor value and anti consumer nature of it, people will still pay for it. A friend absolutely hates it but paid for it so she couldn't live without Splatoon 2.
Kyle Campbell the cloud saves are for if your sd card breaks, or if your switch crashes and corrupts your data, you can get a new switch and when you sign into the old account, you will still have your old progress. It takes BARELY any storage to hold a save file, and yet Nintendo barely offers any
Nintendo charges extra for AC adapters for products that have rechargeable batteries. Process that shit. Think about it. They're fucking greedy. The word 'Nintendo' means greedy in a way that greedy cannot describe.
+Joey Greathouse OH SHIT ! It's like Sony with the Playstation Classic ! Oh and SNK too with their own Neo Geo Classic. At least with 3DS A LOT of people already had the AC adapter so... Besides every compagnies are greedy.
No the manual save backup should be an option. I think Cloud is a lot more different to manage since it's saved elsewhere and I bet that cost money to maintain.
Splatoon 2 got done dirty. While the service probably won't die, I will do my best on my end not to support this shady shenanigans. By not buying it, and simply playing singleplayer games, or in the case of Smash, just play locally. With how the Switch functions in general, I really could just directly go to my friends house and game on right then and there. That and historically, Smash online from the Brawl era still spooks me. Adding insult to injury, Smash 4 technically had a pretty decent online (compared to Brawl) and that was during the Wii U era when online was free. The Switch is an amazing concept and I would like the concept to develop further. I'll support that. But as for the software side of things, online multiplayer games plus the service they use are a no go on my end. Also its Nintendo, so odds are I'll be spoiled for choice on the singleplayer front. It is a little disappointing, but the most I can do is just not buy into it. While it does suck to have a bunch of options of games to be cut on my end, thats how the market works. Your wallet, your choice. That choice, is a "vote" of sorts. If you put your choices elsewhere, you're effectively voting for some other product. Also Bayonetta 3 is on the way, and if its good (can't rule out every possibility now can we?), I'll add that to the list of singleplayer games to play. While my decisions won't make a difference, at least I can feel like it is.
They're doing everything in their power to make me want to pay for online and I really do. The new weapons, subs, stages, SPECIALS, and the 48 HOUR SPLATFEST. I'm this close to tipping over the edge.
You know how it goes. The consumer votes with their wallet. Every one person that doesn't pay for NSO does go noticed in the long run. I do think if the ENTIRETY of the community went with a cold "nope" for about a month or two; Nintendo would have backpedaled. Though that's a theoretical nigh-impossibility all things considered.
He's a failed Cookie Monster clone, but since Cookie Monster was already... incompetent, Arlo turned out superior in every way except for sheer Tard strength.
The reason it's absurd for online to cost extra is that it doesn't take as much maintenance as you'd imagine. Most games aren't hosted on servers they set up. If we play a game together, we are connecting directly to each other, and Nintendo has nothing to do with it. It's called a peer to peer(p2p) connection. My parents firewall blocks p2p connections, so I can easily tell when a game is running p2p and most switch game use it. They are literally charging for us to connect directly with each other. Steam at least helps out if needed. They have some extra features to intermediate a p2p connection if needed. It's a far better service, ignoring the price altogether.
+Dr. G&W but he doens't truly understand Peer to peer, how Sony, MS, Nintendo aren't always playing for online, third party games its done by that company example Ubisoft sorry he needs research online play more
@@DrGandW lol, yeah. I stopped the video 4 minutes in to answer his retorical questions. The exact moment I pressed play after posting, he went right into p2p. I didn't expect that.
People say "it's not alot of money whats the problem" but when it lacks the most simple online feature like messaging and party chat and apps then yes its not worth it
Whenever people say that, all I have to say is this: Just because there's a less expensive alternative doesn't mean that said alternative is necessarily good.
I had enough. Literally yesterday I thought that I'm gonna buy a Switch instead of an Xbox One X because it's online isn't for free. And now this! Why do companies do that???! We buy their *expensive* consoles and accessories only to receive this?! I had my hopes high but now...
Contrary to what some people believe, Servers aren't a magical fix. Its mostly just a convenient excuse. Just like how people in Splatoon 2 like to complain about tick rate when 99% of the time its not a factor in any of their problems. When you say "It all comes down to how good each players internet is" Servers don't change that. Its not going to improve your connection with your opponents, in fact its going to make your ping with other players worse. All servers do is add some extra negotiation steps that can help the game appear to run better, and clear up conflicting information. Throttling your speed is still a thing even with servers. The BIGGEST reason for having servers is for input verification and security, not necessarily for gameplay. To expect nintendo to move all their games to dedicated servers for a measly $20 a year is irrational. That was never ever ever even on the table to begin with. We are stuck with P2P, and I don't really expect Smash or MK to use dedicated servers either despite what Reggie said. He was talking about infrastructure, and not necessarily commenting at all on P2P vs Dedicated gameplay servers. IN ADDITION... P2P vs Dedicated servers is ONLY addressing gameplay servers. This does not address matchmaking servers, or servers dedicated on running security by monitoring games, and it does not address services like Miiverse, flipnote hattena or in-game events. Lastly, 1V1 games SHOULD be P2P. They just all should. Its soooo frustrating playing say... fortnite playgrounds with 1 other person ( or even by yourself ) and suffering issues in the game due to server connectivity or server load. Thats Asinine. P2P works VERY well for 1v1 games, and has virtually no drawbacks.
since I can't play splatoon 2 i'm gonna play splatoon 1, if I still can that is, I haven't heard any news about diabling wii u online yet but hey ho we'll see
I disagree that sony/microsoft or nintendo should charge for online. Firstly, Sony and Microsoft do not pay for the servers for the third-party games, Ubisoft pays for the servers in Ubisoft games and so on. Additionally, they are charging for features of games that WE ALREADY PAID FOR. If you buy a game like Rainbow Six Siege, where there's almost no singleplayer content, that means they want you to pay 60 Dollars per year to basically play the game you already paid 60 Dollars for. You also wouldn't call Battlefield or Call of Duty a full game without Multiplayer.
@@firenze6424 exactly it's called the cost of doing business I honestly regret getting the switch it's games are lack luster and I would of never agreed to the pay wall internet service if I knew it was peer to peer.
Yeah, Arlo's argument was full of the exact same arguments I see people defending paid online that both don't understand how the online works (namely, that it's peer-to-peer and there ARE no servers people are paying for) and that "It's a business" is not a magic end-all excuse to justify something. The Epipen price hike was "just business", but pretty much everyone feels it was a horrible move. Nevermind the fact that his argument for Steam could also be used for online for consoles, namely that they would also want a larger userbase of online players because then more people will buy their online games. I refuse to pay for online for my console, and because of that, games such as Splatoon 2 are completely off my radar and I won't consider purchasing, and fighting games I am buying on PC instead.
why clearly Arlo has no clue what he's talking about, he should do some research about how online play works, bottom line none of console makers should be charging customers the online service its bullshit
Agreed, none of them should charge for online. I am not just critical of Nintendo over this, but all of them. They can go ahead and charge for all the other stuff, cloud saves, discounts, giveaways, etc... but not their peer-to-peer online. The reason the only change Sony did from PSN on the PS3 to the PS4 was to toss online behind the paywall because they knew that would get far more to pay for it JUST for the online, despite online costing them nothing. Also, as Arlo mentioned, cloud saves either should be free (Like Xbox and Steam do) or they can go ahead and charge for them..... *IF* we have a free alternative like the PS4 and previous Nintendo systems did.
I KNOW every one stop paying for nintendo online and for a month or 2 (yes i know its long) and nintendo will stop making nintendo online a thing!!! it may suck but its all worth the wait... like if you agree ...
raybriel mundo unfortunately it is a trend that is going to continue in the entertainment industry unless the government stops it like loot boxes. With smash coming out with their ranking online system, it’s pretty close to impossible if you are a competitive players including games like splatoon 2 and Dragonball fighters. They probably will try to improve the service but not anytime soon from what we see
raybriel mundo Actually no they won’t lol. They can care less whether people actually play on Nintendo Online. They still get money from all the games purchased every single day. $20 for online from people doesn’t matter to them. They still make insane amounts of money and there will always be people on the online service
The Switches Online Service is a disgrace. It might be at a third of the price of the other two, but you're also only getting like 1/20th of the service they have. Nintendo's Online experience has always been the least comfortable and least functional, but since it was free it was somewhat acceptable. Dedicated servers don't make sense for all games (ie it wouldn't make sense to run servers for the 2-player NES-Games) but games like Splatoon would benefit massively (though given how the game appears to be coded, it would still be a mess if all they did was introduce proper dedicated servers to it). Nintendo if you want me to pay for your online service you need to fix your games online modes, you need to be willing to invest into an infrastructure including servers, you need to offer games that are worth a subscription, you need to make your online system comfortable and well integrated with the firmware and software, you need to be transparent about what you're doing and what you're planning to do and probably most importantly you need to stop doing shitty business practice like removing the feature to backup your saves locally only so that a few more people feel forced to pay your online service that I predict to flop horribly. If you're disappointed with the service I suggest you to not buy it. If enough people refuse to pay for a shitty service Nintendo might realize there's something wrong with it.
Yeah, online has never really been Nintendo's strong suit. They should get some technicians who actually know a thing or two about network infrastructure.
I agree, and I haven't purchased the service myself, mostly because of Splatoon 2. With that being said, what did you mean when you said "given how the game appears to be coded"?
The sad thing is that even if the service was successfully boycotted, Nintendo would probably interpret that as people not wanting online at all, and we still get less. So many of their games would be 10x better with competent online features. It’s such a shame.
Martino Fontana or more accurately someone kills you but because your network is slower you die out of thin air for no reason then they appear in front of you out of nowhere or they shoot and kill you through a wall on your screen then the move around the wall and start shooting again. Like in pubg when the internet speeds are different between players.
Payed Online is wrong, especially for Sony and Microsoft because the majority of games played online on the systems are third party games, third party games where the servers are hosted and maintained by the *third parties*. This means that for the most part, Sony and Microsoft are just pocketing money that they didn't deserve. And with the case of them hosting servers being expensive there is a pretty simple solution, you pay a subscription for access to all the other content and features and if you don't pay, you only have access to peer to peer multiplayer rather than dedicated servers. It makes it way more forgiving than having to pay a subscription just to send information back and forth on internet connections that we already pay for.
i'm pretty sure they don't even pay for the severs of the first party games since they didn't make them they just funded them unlike Nintendo, even tho Nintendo doesn't pay for their first party servers either because they are player to player
@@MinePlayersPE Yep. That's right folks, we live in a world where you can get Tetris for free. *_But have to pay money in order to play it the way it was meant to be._*
@@aki-lucky8345 What about my original comment didn't make sense to you? I said there's a Tetris that we get for free. But in order to play it like Tetris has always been played, you have to actually pay.
From what it seems like, any switch game with a decent or even partially competitive online functionality will not support Cloud saves. If this is true, I'm willing to bet next year's Pokemon game will also not support it.
With Pokemon, I suspect that they don't want you to dupe your Pokemon. Notably, the VC Pokemon games don't support the save state that every other VC game does. Save backups basically allow you to dupe the same one as much as you want. Of course, I don't think that it's a good reason if that is why they are doing it...
The Pokemon games have already been shown to not have cloud saves. They claim it's to prevent cheating, but the problem is, to modify a save the way they thing you will, you need a hacked Switch anyway, so it's entirely pointless.
They probably have save data in the carts like usual. Cpt Toad Treasure Tracker didn't need any download. And it has save data on the cart. Pokemon has historically made save files on the carts of their games, so I'm not surprised.
E Smo I’m pretty confident that I’d Let’s Go won’t support cloud saves that any Pokémon game that goes on switch won’t These things tend to be standardized even if it’s a bad choice on Nintendo’s part
Yupp, because Gamefreak has always done a great job at preventing cloning, copying, duping, and hacking in Pokemon, I'm sure that no cloud saves is all they need to do to prevent the game from getting hacked almost instantly.... again.
PS4 might have a better value in most opinions and be doing better with data backup, but I'm still not paying an extra $60 a year for it. I mean, fine if people like it, but I'm kinda with Arlo on thinking that's a steep price just to play the games online and while the PS+ freebies are a nice thought, they tend to be games that I either have no interest in or games that I did have interest in so I bought them a year ago. Still not paying for NSO unless things get better and the data backup gets less scummy.
Here is what I feel would be a better way to do this whole Nintendo Switch Online thing. All games released prior to it's launch should have kept their free online play, rather than just the non-Nintendo games. This way, games like Smash and the next big Pokemon game that has competitive battling are incentives to buy online, but people who bought Splatoon or Mario Kart aren't being given the finger. Release bundles of free games through Online. Sure, maybe they start with the 10 or whatever that is available, but then every so often they could release some more classics, starting with all of the big NES titles and then moving to the SNES, N64, Gamecube and Wii. Heck, even some Gameboy and DS ports would be nice. Imagine playing Pokemon Platinum on a Switch?!
super goron i'm with you on that. At the very VERY least, allow people to transfer a local save onto an SD card. nothing says anti-consumer like limiting your ability to port saves onto an sd card
I was so used to just connecting to the internet for free on my 3DS, now if I want to race my friend online in Mario Kart I have to pay just to use the intetnet.
Mario kart 7 and smash 4 were the best things I played with friends and I hate that now nintendo is being stingy and is caring more about money rather than the dedicated fans
That varies largely from game to game, but they really should have had something else; most children nowadays won't want to play NES games, especially not shit like Tennis.
The argument that online shouldn't be free isn't an argument I agree with, but it's an argument I can understand. It comes from a reasonable place for sure. But Nintendo's online is legitimately extortion.
"Nintendo. They don't understand marketing. They don't understand how to run a business. But they do understand how to make video games." - dunkey
and making conzolez
They do understand marketing, and they do understand how to run a business. Their company has only existed for like 130 years. You have to know something to exist that long.
The problem he’s getting at but didn’t convey right there is the corporate culture at Nintendo is honestly somewhat toxic. All the high positions of power are filled by 65+ year old business suits who have been here even before Nintendo became a game maker. And as such are coming from a totally different perspective then the 40 years old and younger people in the company that know them as a game maker first. This creates a lot of tension up top, especially considering these aren’t any old business suits, these are Kyoto business suits. The strictest, and “oldest school” of them all. They aren’t comfortable with adopting new ideas right away. Never have been never will be.
Thankfully we’ve seen strides to introduce fresh blood into the company on a large scale. Splatoon was developed by a younger team. Odyssey was developed mostly by a younger team. ARMS. Younger guys. Xenoblade? Monolith employs guys straight outta college. The current president of Nintendo is a guy who grew up with the stuff. The problem is that as new people are pouring in, the older crowd isn’t. They’re very hesitant to step away and leave their corporate empire in the hands of “children” who would ruin what they made.
Anyways to reiterate. Nintendo is a business that knows how to sustain itself. However, they have trouble evolving.
"Nintendo does not get online. Nintendo's the guy who's still using Internet Explorer, you know what I'm sayin'? They're still over there using Ask Jeeves."
-dunkey, 2015
Because Dunkey is a bucket of wisdom XD
Jayden C No, they're not good at that either. lol The Switch is an exception because it's a handheld, which is one of the few things Nintendo gets.
The online service should be free, so we can say "it's bad, but at least it's free"
The existence of PC multiplayer games invalidates any excuse anyone has for paid online. It's existed, and continues to exist, for free, no strings attached.
ColdTiger77 I think it’s good right now tbh. 20 bucks for a year and you get nes and maybe even snes games (In the future) plus it makes hacking and smurfing pretty hard to do unless you have some money to throw around.
@@stakefr0mjatefarmvods534 this is only true while the game is bringing in profits. Basically servers for a game to play it online are paid by the income said game makes. Be it the base cost of the game or any other income made by extra content said game may have. You can't expect a company to go into losses to provide online connectivity. Many older games still have online play thanks to people that put up their own servers due to the love they have for those games.
@@jucedogi Servers cost basically nothing to run unless it's an MMO. Unless literally no one is playing the game, they're not operating at a loss, and I'd they are, it's a miniscule loss.
@@stakefr0mjatefarmvods534 server cost is relative to various variables and while true MMO's cost more others do cost also. Independent of this no company is obligated to run them at a loss.
A fan is not afraid to criticise their favorite company. A fanboy constantly claps and barks their praises like a seal with a chromosome deficiency. Thank you for being a true fan, Arlo.
Arlo out here with the no filter, no BS criticisms.
I bet I have more chromosomes than you hater
Like Gamexplain for example...
Your right.
So you can compare a fanboy who have constant praise with people that have Down syndrome?
“We paid 8 dollars for lag?”
“I paid 20!”
$35 a year for lag. Heck that's nothing
If that ain't a Spongebob movie reference, idk
10/10 SpongeBob reference
Best Spongebob Reference....rip Stephen Hillenburg.......But still this get a rating of over 9001/10
"i paid 60 for lag on xbox"
What really bugs me, though - they delayed it for a year and it’s basically the same thing as when they announced it. It’s like they decided to do nothing for an entire year and just launched what they were going to launch a year ago. I have to wonder where all of the man hours went.
They had a massive, private Smash Bros. Ultimate tournament to decide which NES games to offer in the "service".
Waiting for mid smash hype season
At least we got more free online
While it lasted lol
Splatfan if you're happy that you've avoided a service for longer, it's clear the service is bad
“Above all, video games are meant to just be one thing: Fun for everyone.”
*-Satoru Iwata*
He would be rolling in his grave if he could see this disaster...
f
Never Forget 😭
Rest in Peace. He would be so disappointed right now.
He is an amazing Nintendo exclusive producer and will always be in our hearts forever 💖 every Nintendo gamers will never forget him 😊😳
We are paying 20 Dollars for...peer to peer connection, some 30 year old games, cloud saves for a select few titles, and special offers they won’t even explain?
Fanboys will defend it though...
To be fair, though, if you’re complaining about $20, I question how you got your Nintendo Switch.
Blue Squid ah I was expecting someone to bring up the flimsy “well then how u have da switch!!1!”. First of all, my parents gave it to me and after you save up for something it’s pretty dumb to have to pay even more for it. Second of all, it’s not the money, it’s the fact that it’s just so inconvenient. I have already purchased a 60 dollar game, why should I need another 20 dollars to make the most of it? Nintendo’s service isn’t even worth 20 bucks, the features suck. Like I said, it’s paying for something that was free for almost 4 consoles in a row, cloud saves on certain titles, some 30 year old games and crappy special offers they haven’t explained.
@GAS It might be an obvious cash grab but honestly, the low price of it means nothing. Also, the toxicity was uncalled for, which goes to show your maturity.
@SuperCullen004 I do understand that the Nintendo Switch Online sucks. A lot. However, $20 really isn’t that much. The process of having to setup the payment is rather inconvenient, but once you do so, you’re all good to go.
Blue Squid I suppose. I just hope that they fix it. We need to get more dlc for splatoon and mk8 deluxe etc. through the services via offers as well as a bigger game library and server upgrades. Then I’d be all for it. But that’s just my opinion.
I pay $90 for internet why would I pay $20 to be able to use that internet
After you already paid $60 for the game itself too, don't forget!
Shenaldrac
Watch this apply to SMM2 😔
IT DID RIP
Vienna The Grill its $3.99 a month the $20 is for a year subscription. U pay it to play Switch games online with other players and also to get NES games to play. That’s why
If you only care about online play it really isnt worth it, after all it uses peer to peer connection. Which means they're charging you (or the other depending who gets to be the host) to use your own internet.
Companies you love are not free from criticism. We're putting food on their plates, they should at least consider our opinion if they don't want to lose customers.
Solutions:
Servers across the board, at least with games it makes sense. (Looking at you Splatoon!)
More than just NES games or the confirmation that SNES/N64 games will come sometime in the future, as someone who's too young to have grown up with the NES, I feel the games just don't hold up to modern or even SNES games. I don't have nostalgia for them, so I'm just kinda left with clunky, archaic shells of the games I actually like (Like Super Mario World or Super Metroid or even N64/Gamecube games)
The ability to back our save files to SD cards, I understand not wanting fans to backup their Pokemon file. We don't want a thousand perfect IV, Shiny, level 100 Pokemon being cloned left and right. If you could backup your Pokemon file, I'm certain at least a few fans would figure out how to abuse the system. But Splatoon? Yeah, I guess people could undo losses in ranked matches IF they learned to abuse the system, but if Nintendo had SERVERS also saving your data as you played online matches, they could detect inconsistencies between the local and server data, and potentially ban players trying to abuse the system multiple times, or just backup the file from their own server whenever you tried to abuse it, I mean: You're online anyway, the file should be backed up after EVERY match. Meaning, after EVERY loss, so you wouldn't be able to have a pre-loss save data floating around in the Cloud.
Switch online exclusive eShop sales. Not big ones, just like, three games a month? I mean, I already own most big games on Switch anyway. But this would be a good incentive for people who just bought their Switch, but can't afford those big Nintendo first party prices right off the back. They see, "Oh, I can get Breath of the Wild for twenty dollars off If I pay twenty dollars for a year of online membership!? Hot Dog!" Breath of the Wild is already a year and a half old game, Nintendo should have no problem discounting the game and a few others for to get newcomers on board with a Switch online membership.
And for the love of all things cute and fluffy. Get rid of the smartphone App. Nintendo, when other companies look at you--They're not laughing because of a joke you made, they're laughing because you look like a Grandpa trying to act like his best understanding of a modern day teenager. Fortnite proved you can have in console voice chat, there's no technical limitations preventing you from doing so. Just, make voice chat from your console an OPTION so people can chose to do it or not. I couldn't care less about voice chat, but many people do. It's not impossible, so just get rid of the controversy and do it.
Anyway, knowing Nintendo will never read this comment. I at least, enjoy sharing my opinion within the Arlo community.
Pokemon doesn't even matter IMO. As long as you aren't making something stupid like pure power Regigigas or so I really could care less if someone just wants something that is sort of able to be gotten in game.
The idea of IVs are stupid anyway.
actually the reason SD saves aren't a thing is that that's how the wii got hacked, people could import bogus save data that allowed you to crash the system and load unsigned code
Likewise, you are not owed a product or service exactly to your desires just because you like a company.
If you don't like their good or service you can get a good or service from somewhere else, but the company you like isn't obligated to make the thing you want. (They might be dumb not to if it loses them money, but that's their choice)
Gamer entitlement is gross.
Clint The idea behind IVs is that every Pokémon is unique. It’s like Pokémon DNA.
I do have a problem with people cloning and spawning shinies and competitive Pokémon. Time is a major factor in competitive, and the players who follow the official rules (Looking at 4.1!) and play legit are at a disadvantage. People who hack acknowledge this.
Real world athletes spend their off season practicing. Esports players spend thousands of hours practicing in their chosen games. There is no reason to complain about spending a week breeding Pokémon - especially with how every generation it gets easier and faster - to be involved in competitive Pokémon.
As for shinies, it’s the concept of supply and demand. Everyone wants a shiny. High demand. But generally only one in four thousand encounters is a shiny. Low supply. Thus, shinies are valuable, and can be used as bargaining chips in trades.
When you can spawn shinies out of nothing at the drop of a hat, you’re flooding the market with fakes. Counterfeits. Thereby reducing the overall value of shinies because demand is reduced.
The easy solution to the Pokémon issue is to require saves before and after online interactions, just like they did in DPPt. That way, trades and battles cannot be undone because they immediately overwrite the cloud save.
“It’s fine... on paper.”
*has paper Mario music playing in background*
Yeah...I just noticed that...
Also, Arlo stole Zack Scott footage. *I think I’m gonna regret that comment*
*Now if you excuse me I’m gonna go back to playing Mega Man until 11 comes out you take care.*
I desperately tried to find a way to edit in a Paper Mario reference, but nothing quite worked right. Great minds think alike, hehehe
I liked the Arlo-CarlsJr bit. (btw know where i'd be able to get a butternut squash shake?)
Paper Mario for Switch confirmed???
Ron? Making a joke.... or just pointing out something that is supposed to be a joke. But then again, to get said joke you’d have to have play paper Mario, a video game. Ron plays video games??
As a competitive Splatoon player, I can confirm this online service is pretty crap. Especially during the recent splatfest, couldn't get through a single game without disconnecting. Every splatfest has been like that, but now we're paying for it. C'mon Nintendo
Not defending the service but if you're constantly DCing, that's on you, not Nintendo.
Egg Benedict
It's on Nintendo for making people pay for peer to peer servers
@@cian2168 I have a wired 30 Mbps+ internet connection and this problem is really only prevalent during splatfests. Not on me
_Galaxia_ then why can i easily get into a game everytime
cup ass I don’t DC during a game but in a lobby a lot of the time it says connection error
Wii, DS and 3DS all offered free online, that's all i'm saying
Lonely Geek You forgot Wii U, but yeah I agree with you.
And GameCube with select games
I just play smash and mario kart online on my 3DS, for free instead of paying for it on Switch
ds didnt have online play
+Lonely Geek
It was complet shit though.
I agree with all of this. Most RUclipsrs on the subject just hop on one side and beat it to death. You gave the pros and cons in a much more honest way, so thank you for that
That's arlo for ya
When even _Arlo_ says the Online has issues, _the online has issues._
When Arlo criticizes Nintendo you KNOW they fucked up
You guys act as if Arlos the nintendo god
babyMilkDud he is
babyMilkDud no, they’re saying Arlo is very positive when it comes to nintendo and rarely criticizes them. So when Arlo says he doesnt like something, you know that something is really bad
But he still bought it. If you feel very passionate about an issue, don’t buy it! I haven’t gotten the online service (and I won’t until Mario Maker switch) but Nintendo won’t watch this video, but they see his 35 dollars (family plan)
"They're acting like this is a new thing" - My older brother when Nintendo first played the NSO service trailer at the latest Nintendo Direct.
BillyBob 125 Yeah.
I swear the Wii U online is more stable then the switche's
True
definitely
And it's F R E E
Not my experience AT ALL
I almost never disconnected in splatoon 1, but on splatoon 2 I disconnect so much.
"If GameXplain's got an analysis machine, I've got a criticism machine." -Arlo
That is indeed what he said. Good job.
Zero Knight *Why weren’t you playable in X Challenge?*
@@xenobestx8423 ikr
The cheat claim Nintendo claims is that by being able to back up your save, you can back up your rank, so if you lose your rank, you can just reload the save, boom, get your rank back.
You know how other games combat that? Dedicated server and your rank is stored on the server instead of locally...
Edit: Basically, Nintendo is inventing a problem that doesn't exist, if you just do things right in the first place.
I think they’ll use the money from online to fix this issue personally. This whole Splatoween event was funded with the assumption they’d make the money back from paid online. The money we’re paying for online isn’t necessarily going towards the online itself, but they’ve already done something in their biggest online game they wouldn’t have done otherwise because of the price. People expect Nintendo to use the money how most /other/ companies would use the money, but I know the reason I /like/ Nintendo is that they’re different, so I get really tired by /both/ people acting like Nintendo can do no wrong /and/ people who act like Nintendo is the most idiotic and backwards company in existence.
Well I mean they can be. The other companies do things that they do for a reason. Nintendo tries their hardest to make their own path, which works sometimes. But something as important as online? That's just not to be trifled with. The most optimal way to host it will be the most optimal way. P2P just plain sucks, and nintendo may not even fix that. I don't even know anymore.
This is how people are cheating in Splatoon currently though! They just use a save editor to change literally anything they want to from rank to getting unreleased weapons.
How do you fix this problem? Dedicated servers.....
This is how people are cheating in Splatoon currently though! They just use a save editor to change literally anything they want to from rank to getting unreleased weapons.
How do you fix this problem? Dedicated servers.....
I don't think you know what you're talking about. Mario Tennis Aces uses Peer to Peer for actual gameplay while keeping all the important information on the servers. I honestly think they'll probably rework Splatoon 2 to do something similar now, and then make it so we can use Cloud Saves with the game.
Also, Splatoon 2 already /does/ keep all your information and stats on servers, otherwise you wouldn't be able to see it in the mobile app, they just treat your local save file as the most accurate source, which isn't necessarily best practice, but if they had a fully locked down system it wouldn't be a problem, and seeing as Cloud Saves weren't originally part of the online service it's not hard to see why the game wouldn't have been developed like that in the first place.
Plus, there's a lot of stuff you can do while offline that can change stuff once you /do/ finally connect to the internet, which means it would be easier and less likely to cause issues if you just treat the local save as the most trustworthy source, and it would mean some major changes to what's possible while offline in the game if they /do/ change it to allow for cloud saves and the such.
Nintendo: *snaps fingers*
Half of the people that play online:I don’t feel so good...
Switch sound effect plays
Shigeru Miyamoto is Thanos confirmed
it upsets me i just got my switch and i cant play splatoon 2 online... THE ONE GOD DAMN THING YOU DO IN SPLATOON OTHER THEN THE STORY MODE THING!!!
You should have gone for the head
Bye bye playerbase
I just got a switch, it's my first Nintendo console. I was under the impression that they wouldn't be the type to be like "oh hey you got your parents to buy you a switch for Christmas congrats little guy, awwww. Now get them to pay more money so you can use the online service, even though they already bought you the
1. System
2. The game
3. The actual internet bill
4. The router and modem
5. The electricity in your house
So you own everything you need to play online. Except for our artificial wall we put up, and it's only purpose is for you to pay us $20 more god damned dollars.
Fuck me.
They could atleast made the NES games don't have Slowdowns anymore... but they failed..
No thanks I’m taken😂
Who is this dumb fella that appeared and said stuff that I can't translate?
Ya but your parents didn’t buy your electricity, motem, and internet purely for your switch
@@Smoothsmoothie They didn't buy any of that for me because I live alone and pay for it all myself, lmfao. My point was that my impression based off little to no prior knowledge was that they didn't do things like that so that kids could get a switch without parents finding reasons to turn them down. Such as finding out about a subscription fee.
Bruh I'm 22 and when my sub runs out on switch I essentially go "ah... wow that sucks... I guess I can't play anything until I find it worth putting more money in this just to play it." Now imagine a kids mom telling them "didn't I just pay *insert amount here* like last week."
A month or so ago I actually bought MH GU and like the fucktard I am I forgot I didn't have a subscription... I haven't played MH GU since I bought it because I don't feel like paying more lmao.
What pisses me off the most about this (and I'm sure many other fans) is that Nintendo delayed this for a long time in order to work on it more so that they can give fans a quality online subscription service....................................................................... and then this is what they throw at us. A whole year later.
Really makes you question what exactly was being "worked on" this whole time that warranted a whole year's delay. A NES emulator and a cloud save system combined couldn't have possibly taken any more than a month to develop for a company like Nintendo, and nothing has changed about online multiplayer.
They seemed to plan it right before the release of Mario party too one of their biggest games... Like they couldn't handle the amount of ppl that r gonna be on it lol
I think it was just a huge money grab cuz of the large smash community
nintendo is ridiculous, I would have purchased the switch a long time ago if they would give us what we want, they could make the switch an incredible system if they would release much more than they have.
Switch is pretty incredible imo though
The reason the cloud saves don't lead to cheating on other platforms is because your online rank, items, status / progress are tied to your ACCOUNT, and not your save data. So the issue here does not lie in cloud saves, but nintendo's caveman online still using friend codes and not having a real Nintendo ID system for their online gaming where that ID saves your status rather than your saves
I was about to type that as well, but then I remembered something:
Splatoon has offline singleplayer modes and I'm 99% sure you can unlock cosmetics in it. A game like Summoners War or Warframe, you literally cannot turn the game on without an internet connection, and that's fine, your stuff is tied to your account. In Splatoon it's possible to have multiplayer items tied to offline singleplayer progression.
I'm sure there is a solution and Nintendo is just too lazy to think of it, but it's not 100% cut-and-dry like you imply it is. It's only like,,, 80% cut-and-dry
The difference between a soda at Carl’s Jr. and online is that if I don’t buy the soda I can still eat the burger I already paid for.
Yetres if you don’t buy the online you can still play the game you paid for
Except it isn't the game we paid for. We paid to play online and are now being forced to pay even more later on.
On some occasions
Well, yes. Some. Of course, some games I bought are singeplayer, but that doesn't protect your ass. My point still stands.
@@aavocadont you can still play the game you paid for. Not having internet doesnt suddenly disable your games. You can still play games like fortnite, which would be useless without internet, without paying for the service. Cry harder.
Nintendo: Does a Switch Online.
Everyone else: You became the very thing you swore to destroy.
Edit: The Switch Online Service makes me want to buy a Wii U just to play Splatoon again.
Doesn’t make sense personally and there literally aren’t enough people to make any boycott
The switch online service might make some SMM2 players go back to SMM1 EVEN IF THAT GAME IS DEAD
Agreed. Switch Online is a sham and even worse, a huge missed oppertunity. I'd happily pay the 20 euros for a decent online service for the switch. But paying that money for an online system that would've been considered barebones 10 years ago, a shitty p2p online gaming infrastructure that is iffy at best and a couple of NES games as a pittance to replace the Virtual Console?
No.
20 euro's isn't a lot of money on a yearly basis but that's a no on principle. I just hope more people do the same, giving Nintendo a signal that they should be doing better than this.
You cant offer sandwiches to a company for internet
The best way to stop something like this is to boycott. Business 101 make money
Scrooge042 Yeah honestly I won’t be getting online either.
"barebones 10 years ago" is very strong wording... since Xbox Live was $50, and offered nothing but online play. No deals, no free games, nada.
Xbox has had support for voice chatting through their console since 2002, and you could actually send messages to your friends through their system. Basic features that still seem to elude Nintendo. Steam had the same features upon launch in 2004. In 2008, Sony updated the Playstation 3 with trophies. All features Nintendo have refused to incorporate into their online to this day. Barebones 10 years ago is putting it mildly.
Not defending the precedent Microsoft has set with holding their online play hostage for such a hefty price (in fact I dislike the consequences it has had), but Nintendo doesn't get a pass from me launching a service like this in 2018. Regardless of the price.
Steam doesn't run any of the servers or backend stuff for online multiplayer games they sell, except for games they themselves make. The same is true for Xbox, PS4, and Switch. It is also true that neither Microsoft, Sony, or Nintendo give a damn cent towards third party companies hosting fees. (and if the game is P2P, then all that is moot anyways)
This person... This person gets it...
Interesting point here is that Nintendo develops a fair amount of online games the service is required for, especially (at least as far as I'm aware) compared to the PS4/Xbox, so if Nintendo happens to decide improving internet quality (adding servers to Splatoon, improving netcode for many other games) is a good idea, we may end up effectively paying less for more compared to Xbox/PS4.
Just in case it isn't clear, I say "effectively" because they could've decided to do that without having paid online, but it's still a part of the online service so I'm counting it as what we pay for.
I know. Technically, Sony and Microsoft are just taking money away from you. They dont even host servers for fuck all. It is sad that they charge you $60 a year just to fucking play online. they don't even host any god damn servers. I switched to PC a few years ago and loved it. And I bought a switch. Both 10/10 purchases.
This makes more work for Nintendo in comparison to Sony or Microsoft. Microsoft only has Halo and Forza. Sony doesn't produce any of the games they own themselves, they just buy exclusive rights or buy out the studios that make the games. Nintendo makes a vast majority of its games so it has to support most of the servers itself. So picking and choosing makes sense for Nintendo, not choosing arms makes sense. Not choosing Splatoon makes zero sense since its the largest online game.
The fact console players defend it shows a lack of understanding of games and servers. The fact you would let sony, Microsoft, and NINTENDO gate keep your internet and u give them money for it lmao
If I'm paying for online and even ONE GAME isn't using dedicated servers and is instead charging ME to use MY OWN internet then I have a problem.
So if I want to play multiplayer online I have to pay
Your using your internet anyway
Makes splatoon pretty much unplayable without the subscription, unless you use the lan play trick
@Nathan Trinh Connects a switch to a custom server to essentially turn the lan play mode of some games into online mode. It's free and works on any banned switches.
fuck nintendo
I play Splatoon Online, we don't have dedicated servers, we don't have save files, we don't have voice chat and we don't have Anti-cheat...
So WHAT AM I PAYING FOR?????
Unsubscribe from them
Exactly. It's just a waste of money. I will not pay for it. Ever.
Link I mean if you wanna play smash, Mario kart, splatoon, Mario Maker, and many others to their full extent you gotta
• Levvvyy • that’s the problem!
Firenze 64 its not a problem, if you work every day of the year for 10 hours a day then you need less than a wage of half a cent per hour to afford online.
that is 2 times less than xbox and 3 times less than ps
and if you cant afford 20 a year then you shoulnt even have a switch
For a hypothetical Virtual Console service, Nintendo should make this the DEFINITIVE Nintendo console that can play NES, Game Boy, SNES, N64, Game Boy Color, GameCube, Game Boy Advance, Wii, Nintendo DS, Nintendo 3DS, and Wii U games.
Thats kinda why virtual console existed. So olders games could be played on the newer system
Wii U would be a stretch on the Switch. I imagine they'd have to port the games to get that functionality, I don't think there's enough juice to emulate a Wii U on the Switch.
Ok, 3DS and Wii U games are a bit extreme here. 3DS is still selling, and Wii U was literally the previous console. Maybe up until the Gamecube games. Or even Wii, but that's stretching it a bit.
VerteX ZM but then again, wii games were on the wii u virtual console if I’m not misinformed
@@TheGuyWhoIsSitting isnt the switch more powerful? why couldn't it play wii u games docked?
When Arlo is mad
You know Nintendo goofed it
True dat
They done goofed up
gawrsh...
I need Iwata to get out of his grave become buff , and walk into the Nintendo headquarters with the fist of the north star theme playing. so I'm just gonna write what I'm envisioning .
*Iwata was reborn the moment Nintendo online came to be , he was filled with rage and strengthened by it .* he walked into the Nintendo headquarters in japan and faced off with the current president Shuntaro Furukawa.
Iwata pointed at him and said , " what have you done this isn't a business Nintendo's a family that strives for quality and being friendly to the consumer ."
Shuntaro sitting in his business chair with his feet up on his desk said , " HA , your an idiot Iwata , with this i can make more money then you could ever imagine."
Iwata charges at Shutaro and slams his face onto the table repeatedly while saying , " you don't even play games your not a developer , why were you placed in this industry , why did they make you a successor, what games have you even played."
Shuntaro resist being slammed down , shoved Iwata off, and unbutton his suit while saying ," first of all i played Pac-man , and second the way you were leading this company was driving it to the ground , testing products so they wouldn't break when dropped ,free online , it was all a risk that we shouldn't have taken."
Shuntaro gripped Iwata's arm and did a judo style over shoulder throw sending Iwata out of the window. Iwata's grip remained fixed to the exposed flooring , and he was stuck dangling off the edge.
Iwata still holding on said , "We do not run from risk. We run to it. We were taking the risk to move beyond the boundaries of the game industry to reach new players and current players. but all you are doing is alienating the work of your predecessors, your fan base and ruining our image for money." Iwata pulled himself up and nailed Shuntaro with a Knee of justice .
Iwata then loosened his tie and said ," Look Shuntaro , while I might not have understood the best business practices , it was through quality ,faith,and helping our supporters that this company could carry on but now with your greed , I'm not sure what i can do to fix it , but what i know is ... I WILL STOP YOU...... fa--lcon ... PUNCH."
ten out of ten shit post I'm gonna go watch some TV now
Wow! Good post!
This is my nintendo lore canon now
Sniff... It's beautiful
Love it! Haha!
Iwata was a legend. even with the Wii U failure he didn't fire people and cut his salary
I legitimately put down Splatoon 2 and turned on the Wii U yet again because it’s free and- get ready for this- it’s not bad at all. I think a lot of other people did the same too because the lobbies are still relatively crowded and I have not had trouble getting in a game in 2019.
I know a few people who defend Switch Online because it's "just $20"
A bad deal is a bad deal, even for $20.
That said a bad deal is also based person to person. Cause what you see as a bad deal another could see it as a bargain.
$20 for a brick in a box is still being scammed for $20, no matter how nice the box, brick, or salesman's smile is.
@@AncelDeLambert I mean, if it's a gold brick, it's not a scam. And hey, maybe the box is made with fine materials and has silver thread and stuff. If I paid $20 for that, I'd be very happy with it. Not talking about Nintendo here, just saying a gold brick in a silver box is worth more then $20.
"Hey, I got kicked in the nuts!"
"Quit whining. It didn't even cost you anything!"
@@BenRK90 damn. I wish i had standards this low. Life would certainly be more enjoyable
The best way to look at Switch Online is comparing what you had available to you six months ago (for free) with what the $20 nets you now.
Switch Online grants you:
- online multiplayer (something that was free before)
- the renting of NES games (which many people already own on Wii/3DS/Wii U/etc and/or have played countless times before- Sony and Microsoft on the other hand give you games that aren't decades old, some of which you probably haven't played)
- the privilege of purchasing exclusive accessories (is this a joke?)
- cloud saves (which aren't as good as backing up your own data offline and many of the games you'd want backed up, like Pokemon and most likely Smash, don't allow it)
Honestly, when custom firmware and piracy solve a lot of your consumers' issues it should be obvious that you made a terrible service.
Get this: When you want to backup your save locally, NINTENDO ACTUALLY BANS YOUR SWITCH.
Obsidian Plague wtf fr?!
@@offradar31 yeah but not because you want to but more because you hacked your console in order to do so. But that's the next problem: They don't allow cloud saves for splatoon 2 because of "cheating" but if a cheater really wants to do so, they have the ability to regardless backup their save because the switch is already hacked...
What I would expect them to do is to put all multiplayer-related save part on the servers only (which they btw actually have, but the servers are ONLY used for matchmaking, after you've found all 7 other players, it basically just leaves you and the other Players alone)
I mean just compare it to the Wii U's service offering....like what
Satoru Iwata would not be happy about Nintendo Switch Online...
R.I.P Satoru Iwata :'c
:'(
F
@some annoying person did he actually say that?
Nobody that has a sound mind would make people pay $60 bucks for a game then make them pay for a service that another company is basically not charging people on the PC.....I mean a lot of people these days have a PC why PAY for it when you could bypass it all together? Like for example my friend plays Fortnite on a PC not on any of the consoles he said he'd never buy digital games on a PC or play any multiplayer games on any console because it'll cost him extra money. The guy is not cool with his money he knows how to save it.
You're already paying micro transactions on some of those games anyway so why pay to play on top of all of that? It makes it even more expensive.
Paying for peer-to-peer is the same as paying for LAN. You have the switch, which you payed for, and the connection, which you payed for, and now Nintendo wants to tax you for the ability to plug into another device.
I keep hearing that "maybe they're working on improving the service right now!" or "they will make it better eventually" but you'd think that they'd have done that with the almost 2 years the Swtich has been out. And during that time, they gave that same service for free... Otherwise why would it be free for this long if they weren't "getting it ready" to use? Did it really take that long to just add the NES Online and cloud save features? I really hope those arguments are right and that they make it better with time. But my point is that the service should've been "ready" with all its features (at least the basic ones, such as dedicated servers) for its release date.
That's my opinion. Nice video! :D
For a second I read at the end "I hope these [defensive] arguments get better over time" like it was a comeback. I must be tired.
But yeah. It really doesn't they actually did anything over the 1-year delay to improve the service. It's confusing.
But dedicated server is not basic, sony and microsoft don't have one (and they don't need to, because the lack of first party online games)
Dai Nu, exactly. Calling dedicated servers a basic function (which could potentially be as complex as recoding massive portions of their games, in addition to the licensing, installation, building actual structures to HOUSE the servers in) is like saying turning a 2 lane highway into a 6 lane highway with an under and overpass is easy.
And yeah, I distinctly remember matches of halo 4 from the xbox 360 days being at least partially peer to peer. I remember the host leaving, and it rotating to find another one. (which is something nintendo DOES need to do better, coding in what to do when the host leaves/disconnects)
Not saying that it's easy... That's why I said they had almost two years to make something happen, at least for the games that would really benefit from it such as Splatoon 2 and HOPEFULLY Smash Ultimate when it comes out.
And then again, I did say basic features, plural... Not exclusively dedicated servers. There's the save data backup thing. They could've made it so you can transfer it to an SD card or USB. But no, they didn't... They took away something that used to be there and even for FREE.
It's easy to feel like now we have to pay for NOTHING to be better, like Arlo said.
⚠️ warning this video has opinions ⚠️
MewnMew2 😵
RRRREEEEEEEE
Oh damn
To safely experience this product, please remember to put away your fragile ego.
Lol
Steam does what NintenDONT.
Nintendo what NintenSHOULDN'T.
NintenDONT please.
For free
Jajaja😂True...sad but true
Lol
i guess back to playing Mario kart with the CPU's
Hard
@@akacylix5290 ???
@@titangamingbot2521 he was saying that he would put the CPU on hard mode when he play by himself
@@kingcs12 oh
This is also really gona kill games like Mario Tennis Aces and ARMS with them being 60 dollar games. At least Splatoon 2 has a meaty enough single player to sink our teeth into along with some tasty DLC on the side, but ARMS and Mario Tennis have really shallow single player campaigns so multiplayer is their main focus. As a result Nintendo made it so those games actually cost 80 dollars for the full experience.
Quite possible. On a side note, it can also turn off people buying those games in the first place. If the online play was always going to be free on the Switch, I probably would have bought Splatoon 2 and ARMS when they were released, earning Nintendo £120 from me. Instead, I didn't want to risk buying either, just in case the online was the only thing that I found fun about them, earning NIntendo £0 from me.
Well, don’t forgot the 20 dollar fee is annual. So by your third year you would have had to pay twice as much as the game itself, excluding dlc.
And 100 for two years, and 120 for three years,...
@@cosmicredpanda2420 True, but conversely you don't have to pay for the online separately for every game.
you could also go to reddit find a family and pay $4 per years.
Said it before, I'll say it agian. Vote with your wallet people. Nintendo is offering you a completely hallow online subscription with broken features and peer-to-peer connections. Dont pay for the service and avoid games that require it for online play. Once the game devs put pressure on them, they will at the very least have to improve the quality of the service.
This needs to be on top
I hope this backfires and hurts the sales for Splatoon 2 and Arms. That would get Nintendo to listen.
it's not that simple. i'm not gonna completely boycott smash, which i basically bought my switch for, just because it costs 20 dollars a month.
Just don't buy online lol. Smash is still playable without it.
Matthew Keys If you bought a console for just one game, you made a really poor purchase. Learn some patience, and ensure that the system you will buy will for sure have multiple games you want to play.
Is it crazy that I want basic functionality features I had on Xbox live in 2005?
lol Juntaro body pillow. Oh shit this got me good.
Playing Halo 2 on the og Xbox was less of a headache than playing Splatoon 2 on switch.
@ingibingi2000 how was Xbox Live in 2005?
@LordSpleach I jumped on Xbox Live when it released in 2002 and it was wild. I remember they had these really trippy voice modifications people could use to mask their identity (one made you sound robotic, one made your voice deeper, etc) but they were so obnoxious Microsoft got rid of them. MechAssault and Unreal Championship were the main titles worth playing online before Halo 2 came out (There was a way to jerry-rig Halo CE to play online through a service called Xbox Connect, but it was janky).
For voice chat, Microsoft came out with an adapter that plugged into the memory slot of the controller and had a headphone jack (something Nintendo should do for the Switch Pro Controller). I bought a 3rd party add on that slotted in so my guest accounts could also do voice chat. The service was great, but at first I had a ton of trouble connecting with one of my friends (had to call customer support in India constantly).
That first year was really special - All of a sudden I had friends from New York and Germany, and some 50-year old guy from Florida joined my MechAssault forum. Even though they stopped releasing good exclusives, I've been on Xbox Live ever since.
Strausburg damn. shoutout to og xbox days. some of my most cherished friends were met in Halo 2
I was a Rank S+ on ALL Splatoon 2 Ranked modes... really proud of managing over 250 hours of gameplay on-par with my actual full time job.
Switch Online came, and I gave them the finger. Sure IT HURTS not to play my beloved favorite game, but letting Nintendo pull off an "EA" on my ass...? No thanks.
Buddy it's 20 bucks. Yeah it's a bitch to pay for online, but at least you'll be able to play your favourite game for a year. (and you get to play some rad ass nes games so I guess that's a plus)
Well I just joined my friends family plan,so I don't have to pay a dime.
$60 for more features and benefits from PS and MS over $20 from hardly anything from Nintendo.
Get splatoon 1, its still got free online.
@@charizard7666 yup, I went back to Splatoon 1, I was already S there, might as well chase the S+
I’m protesting purchasing this service until they fix it or at least take some form of public action about it. I’d rather go without online than have my arm twisted into paying for a crappy service because “it’s only $20!”.
Yep. Me and my 3 friends as well.
Same. I backed up my data with the trial that's all I needed
Unfortunately, so many people are giving in that Nintendo is already profiting off this service a lot. So the only thing I’m betting on is if they want more people to buy it is to make it less of a scam, but then they would have to put actual effort into it.
Cool...but refusing to purchase a product because it isn't of good enough quality isn't a form of protest. It's called being an informed consumer.
Framing it as 'protest' just smacks of entitlement. Nintendo doesn't owe you anything. You don't owe Nintendo anything. They haven't wronged you or anyone in any way. A 'protest' implies Nintendo has done a social or personal wrong that must be rectified if they are to be a part of society and do business (you know, like segregation boycotts in the 1960's)
David Stinnett I am protesting this shitty service, and the bad business practice of expecting your customers to bend over and take whatever you give them out of brand loyalty. What you seem to be talking about is a boycott, and I never claimed to be engaging in that type of protest.
But yes, you could call it “voting with your wallet” if you’d rather. Either way, I’m refusing to purchase in an attempt to send a message about their business practices. Sounds like a protest to me.
The reason we shouldn't pay for online, is because servers are handled by developers. Not the console creators.
True but won’t stop nintendrones from defending it
im still gonna pay for it either way not paying for it will do nothing at all
nintendo makes splatoon, smash, mario kart, etc. The 3rd party games have free online. (i hate the online, though.)
@@lilcloutvevo can you explain why there are so many Jc dentons everywhere
@@lilcloutvevo sorry but I have been seeing that pic alot
A moment of silence for Splatoon 2.
.................................................................................................................
.
..
..............................................................
Splatoon 2 is the only online game I play on switch; and it got the short end of the stick in almost every way from the online service
@@justrightgaming3333 And what's most infuriating (for me) is that Splatoon is easily Nintendo's most hardcore competive online game. It requires actual skill. This is the one game that needs servers and voice chat.
TheAlibabatree And cloud saves!
*plays taps on inkling musical instruments*
Here's my problem. I have no problem with paying for online for games when it's just a side feature. What I have a problem with is paying for online for games that revolve entirely around online. Splatoon's main mode is all about going online. Which means that I'll be paying $20 a year just to play the game I already paid $60 for. Sure, it has a single player mode, but when I've finished it, there will be nothing left to do if I don't fork up the cash.
extremely valid especially when fortnite is free to play online but splatoon isn't 😭
Yeah and Mario Maker 2? HALF OF THAT GAME'S FEATURES ARE ONLINE!!!! NOW ALL I CAN DO IS STORY MODE OR MAKE LEVELS!
Agreed. You shouldn't have to pay to be able to play a game you already paid for. The same reason I hate the new n64 emulator because not only do you have to play for Nintendo online you have to pay for the extension just to play the 2 or 3 games you want to play. I ain't doing that shit. I'd rather buy a wii u just to play n64 games.
To all those saying that it doesn't matter because Sony and Microsoft have $60 services: If someone is selling a hot dog for 10 dollars, and someone else was selling a piece of crap shaped like a hot dog for 10 cents, I'd just go hungry.
Jack Moffat id pay for the hot dog
I agree with most of that. I have a few things I disagree with though
I was really looking forward to playing smash ultimate online and going competitive with it. Now it seems pretty much impossible for me since this service is shit. Oh god the smash 4 online days are coming back. I have the money, and I got 20 bucks specifically for this, but I'm not buying anything right now.
If you kept the original price it would be more accurate lol.
At least Sony and Microsoft have monthly games with the membership. I don't expect Nintendo to be like Sony and have monthly games be over £100 for free but they could give a decent game or even an old ds game like Lego battles, something that used local play they can now make it fully online like Mario party ds or Plants Vs Zombies.
2016 Arlo is back baby!
What is 2016 Arlo? I didnt know him back then.
He was a little bluer.
What!!! I thought he died twice and got cloned on three seperate occasions. What will this do to the legend of Arlo timeline???
Nelsathis 2016 ninteno
In 2016 he became popular for criticising Nintendo on games like Colour Splash. His videos on Colour Splash, in particular, gained a lot of attention and he was one of the most popular fans to criticise the game.
Nintendo Switch Online just killed Splatoons 2. I just tried to play an online match and it wouldn't let me play just because I don't have a membership. Nintendo Switch Online just killed the most popular mode in Splatoon 2.
ikr
Splatoon*
@@oof9165 No dude he clearly means he killed the 2 which *probably* means that Splatoon is better
This is just a joke that might be true :/
Jusy get a membership it’s 20 bucks rofl
+RitaThePally You're part of the problem.
My younger brother got splatoon 2 a few weeks ago for his birthday and now he cant even play online lol it sucks
Me too
#ripsplatoononline
Same here.
still not sophia did u contact Nintendo and try to fix that?
same thing happened to me. I ended up paying. Don't get me wrong I hate Nintendo switch online but what else could I do
I do not like splatoon but wow, I would of pissed on my switch
When they initially announced the service, and said there would be a back catalog of games on the service, I was ready to pay only $20/yr for it. As time went on, it never changed from just NES games. I was hoping to get some SNES games or GB or N64, but no, just a handful of NES games. I dont really play online anyway, so now I have absolutely zero reason to pay for it.
I laughed out loud at NES games...would have been impressive for free on DS.
N64 games would have been impressive for free on 3DS...
But Switch? We should be wondering what GameCube and Wii games we will be getting included with our sub.
there is gonna be SNES there was a datamine that showed a icon for a controller that looked Very similer to SNES
I don't think they could have done that part in a more disappointing way. "Here's 20 NES games, but you get 3 more a month; nothing else though."... What a joke.
Same
To be fair, the 3DS can't handle emulating the Nintendo 64. So N64 games for free would have been impressive
on the Wii U. And we're not getting GameCube or Wii games on the Switch unless they're straight ports.
the service is so bad that even Arlo doesn't like it.
They're were left 35k dislikes on their ad for it so yeah Nintendo is being Nintendo. I didn't buy their shitty cardboard just for a game, and I won't buy a shitty online service just for a small por th in of the virtual console and a feature that should be free. With Net Neutrality going away slowly, this is getting absurd that gamers have to pay for internet at least 3 times just to play their games online.
james wolfsbane unless they give us dedicated servers, no online game should have a pay wall front of it: Ps4, Xbox and switch
That doesn't really say much; Arlo hasn't ever really been shy of criticizing even things he likes.
@@jameswolfsbane7261
He doesn't have to agree with Arlo.
@@Openreality actually it has way more games then the new classic and with better graphics
I'm not to going to lie to you chief, this Switch Online ain't it.
Tru dat, dawg.
There's a starman waiting in the sky Speedwagon-sama, you’re always right.
Indeed chief
Indeed
There's a starman waiting in the sky
Thankfully some games haven’t been effected ... Padlins And Fortnite are free to download and free to go online
It's not "if the customer is willing to pay". The fact that so many games REQUIRE online to play in the first place (Destiny, Titanfall, etc.) and many games are mainly played online (COD, Battlefield, etc.) you're being forced to pay for a service that is well overpriced and under managed. Your soda Carls Jr example would make sense if they sold soda for $4 - $5, but it just isn't comparable. I highly advise you to look into the amount of work it takes to create and "upkeep" online servers. It's literally highway robbery when you compare it to the yearly fee. This is why nobody but Xbox charged at first for online, but because they set the precedent, others followed their footsteps for that easy cash.
Sony & Microsoft: Here’s this $60 game released only a few months ago for FREE for being a member! We do this every month!
Nintendo: Here’s a bunch of 30-year old games that everyone and their mom has played a million times that have aged so badly in today’s climate, they hardly hold your attention! Don’t you dare expect GameCube games for free! Those are only 15 years old!
Calvin Bremer I’m so mad at Nintendo for this... like how much do they have to make off these old crappy games. It’s funny cause if they offered NES games on the N64 it would have been laughed at.... but now... uhhh nostalgia
I've long since given up hope of a virtual console. It seems like Nintendo aren't going to make individual titles available for purchase either. Out of all their classic titles there are maybe a handful I would actually want to purchase (and have multiple times) in the past. Super Metroid, Link to the Past, etc. etc. I've bought many of my favorites multiple times. But I'll be damned if I pay $20 just to access a bunch of NES titles I don't give a rat's ass about. This is the thing with Nintendo they like to bitch and moan about piracy and emulation. But they themselves are the ones who push people towards emulation because they can't be bothered to make their classics available. I am sorry but the mini systems don't cut it either. Your essentially given a bunch of roms (that's what they are) that Nintendo has selected. I want to choose the titles I buy. Hell the SNES mini classic doesn't have chrono trigger. It doesn't have DKC2 or DKC3 either.
I've just downloaded the classics I want and play them on my PC. I did buy a SNES mini classic with the express purpose of loading it up with additional roms. I also put many of these games on my hacked Vita.
Paragraph Paragraph Paragraph Paragraph Paragraph Paragraph Paragraph Paragraph Paragraph Paragraph Paragraph Paragraph Paragraph Paragraph Paragraph Paragraph Paragraph Paragraph Paragraph Paragraph Paragraph Paragraph Paragraph Paragraph Paragraph Paragraph Paragraph Paragraph Paragraph Paragraph Paragraph Paragraph Paragraph Paragraph Paragraph Paragraph Paragraph Paragraph Paragraph Paragraph Paragraph Paragraph Paragraph Paragraph Paragraph Paragraph Paragraph Paragraph Paragraph Paragraph Paragraph Paragraph Paragraph Paragraph
They do not give you $60 games for free, you still payed for that. Not to mention the amount of times they give that quality in their payed for service is rare. Honestly steam is the way to go for an online market. It's free for online and they have sales often.
+IcySpark This. So many people tout the free games. They aren't free if your paying $60 a year for a subscription.
I absolutely refuse to pay for Switch online. I don't even care. An ice cream truck can sell only empty ice cream cones and say "it's cheaper than ice cream", but... why are you selling empty ice cream cones? Ya know? I want ice cream, fam.
Dayum, now I want ice cream...
That's a bad example
They might of ran out of ice cream but I don't care cause I like to eat the cones
It isn't a bad example, you have a biased opinion. Not everyone just wants to eat the cones.
@@xdiamondx5721 okay then
It's not just Steam that's free. Ubisoft has Uplay, EA has Origin, and Blizzard has Battle.net. IF EA CAN MAKE THEIR SERVICE FREE THEN NINTENDO HAS NO EXCUSE.
There also the fact that EA gave out free games once in a while just for being on Origin. Only bought The Sims 4 and I ended up with Dead Space, Theme Hospital, SimCity 2000, among others without paying a dime. The Consumerist’s worst company of the year in 2012 and 2013 is literally being more pro-consumer than Nintendo.
@@ChunkSchuldinga can we spread this thread to make sure the gaming community sees this and possibly nintendo? I honestly think your reply to my comment is a lot more well worded and presented than mine lmao
Nintendo isn't going to do anything about it as long as people keep paying for it. EA would easily charge if given the opportunity, but PC is an open platform and people would stop buying from them. If you actually want to see changes, then you need protest with your wallet instead of your mouth.
@@Nico-ur2po A man can wish. Also I'm not paying for online lmao
as the koreans say. 인정합니다. or i agree bc EA is a bumfuck stupid ass company and yet they ahve free internmet service bc YOU CAN'T RESTROICT THE INTERNET
Don’t buy it. Revolt against them. This is unacceptable. I refuse to pay for this. I can install retroarch and play all these nes games online for free.
The only way to make this go away is to boycott it! Let them feel the pain in their wallets
Well yes you can do that but you know thats _illegal_
+Abdulrahman Mustafa so charging for online you don’t provide is criminal
@@firenze6424 well yes its a complete scam but it dosent break any laws.
+Abdulrahman Mustafa well they can find out you illegally downloaded a game without violating privacy laws
You forgot about the biggest problem with this service. Voice chat that is so limited that it may as well not exist
Instinct Labs IMO Nintendo could have solved this one way. Put a headphone jack in the joycons and Pro Controller. It’s very difficult to play games like Fortnite without communicating with your fellow players and playing docked while having your headset plugged into your Switch is a mess. Support a headphone jack and Nintendo could even sell their own headsets which would make a lot more money and people would be more willing to pay and use it. Makes a lot more sense to me than a smartphone app
That's not a problem
LOSTLEAD8R Uh yeah it is! One of the best things about Ps4 and Xbox is being able to easily talk and interact with friends and strangers. Sure Nintendo has attempted this but it should be through the console itself, not a flawed phone app with extremely limited features.
LOSTLEAD8R not a problem‽ LOLOLOLOL!! Maybe not for you, but for a LOT of people it is a problem! Sure, it’s a first-world problem and there are workarounds, but other companies have proven its possible, Nintendo just doesn’t want to do it.
@@Sting_ray because Nintendo isn't nearly as worried about the 'online' scene as they are the old fashioned local co-op scene...
People already have to pay for internet and the $300 console, plus the games. In the ads there are happy families playing the switch....bet their smiles will turn upside down when they see that they have to pay $35 freaking bucks to play online. Edit: thanks for the likes and replies!
Ohhhh noooooooooo $3 a month :( weeeeeh
It's only 20 bucks.
Kuro Wanwan It might be cheap but that doesn't mean it's worth it.
Don't play online then
Don’t forget the best games are over £50 with dlc
Regarding how Splatoon 2 seems to have been shafted by NSO, my theory is that it's all trickle-down from poor initial game design decisions.
The real crux of the problem with Splatoon 2 in particular is that everything in the game is clientside. There is no substantial server verification happening anywhere in the pipeline. All of your online stats and your gear are clientside, and from what I understand, as long as your Switch thinks it's valid, any other Switch in your online game will pass it off as valid, since it's all P2P. It's why hackers were able to play as Octolings early, or force people onto forbidden maps in online mode, or pull of crazy stunts like instantly turfing the entire stage with ink at the start of a Turf War. Never trusting the client is always Network Security 101. It was a flawed design from the beginning, and now ALL of Splatoon 2's netcode is structured around this. It would be wholly infeasible to rewrite it to a serverside architecture.
Now, I don't know if the heart of this problem being at such odds with an online service stem from Splatoon 2's development predating the NSO design spec (bad, but understandable), or if the NSO spec was designed specifically to cater to this architecture (VERY bad), but if it's the former, then there was nothing NSO would have been able to do. Splat 2 *will not* ever support dedicated servers, because it was never designed to do so. That's just not something you roll out in an update, that's something you write a whole new sequel for. So I believe it could be the case that Splat 2 was sadly grandfathered out of the system.
And regarding cloud saves, my bet is that Nintendo saw just how gapingly wide open Splat 2 has been blown that they explicitly denied it from the online save functionality because they don't want it to become an attack vector into their new service. I bet Splat 2 would support NSO cloud saves just fine, it's just quarantined out because it's so egregiously infected. The talk about wanting to curb hacking is likely a corporate coverup.
That all said, I don't know for sure why LGPE is also out of the cloud save party. My guess? It was developed by GameFreak and Niantic, two companies that are quite excellent at a number of things they do, but are... admittedly lacking in other departments. Pokemon games have had a track record of dropping the ball with their networking services, and Niantic has been agonizingly dragging Pokemon Go through development hell since its release, with its poor stepbrother Ingress licking at the dirt in PoGo's boot treads for nourishment. Maybe they just weren't up to the task of implementing the feature? I really don't want that to be the reason... if some random Joe Indy can do it, you'd think AAA devs could... I guess I really don't know for sure.
Diamond Ice NS
I think you hit it right on the head. Nintendo’s corporate culture of lifelong service and apprenticeship has prevented them from hiring outside experts in online play, leading to a bunch of mistakes with their net code that other companies already dealt with over a decade ago. I really think that unless Nintendo can become more flexible and hire outside help, these things won’t be fixed until their next console.
I think for Pokemon they're more afraid of people duping rare pokemon more than anything since it seems like it could be extremely easy to explot.
As for Splatton 2, yeah that's a mess I doubt they'll fix.
Nintendo switch online and EA in a nutshell
Gamers: Congrats Nintendo for the new feature
Nintendo and EA: Hello i like Money
Gamers: why did you choose to put this new feature on?
EA and Nintendo: Money!
The new Nintendo president worked at EA soo what’s going on!?
Wii U: Curses!
Wii U: Not fair! Switch gets all the people and I haven’t even had one customer!
Wii U: GRRRRR! GRRRRRRRR! GRRRRRRRRR!!
Saddest part is that reggie was replaced by a former VP of EA...
It's not as bad as EA but it still sucks
Every game company is like that honestly
My Nintendo switch is starting to warp, and I am past my warranty. I have 300+ hours of Splatoon 2. Any day now my switch could just bite the dust, and I could lose everything. Thanks Nintendo.
THATS NOT HOW IT WORKS. YOUR DATA IS STILL THERE. JUST GET ANOTHER SWITCH FOR YOUR ACCOUNT. THE DATA IS IN THE CLOUD.
@@mrmanakin9684 nintendo does not provide cloud support for splatoon along with many other games
venomouscarnage
Are you an idiot? Did you not even pay attention to anything anyone has said?
RIP
@@dalemonshateu6948 look I know there are games that don't support cloud saving. But that's not really a big issue. Also switch online is not as bad as everyone makes it. Don't call me an idiot for being correct. Switch online is brand new. Just be patient because it will evolve. It's at it's starting point. Quality does not come instantly. Quality is something Nintendo works hard on and is also the reason why they don't announce loads of big games at once. Because they make sure there is quality. Switch online is a good thing. So stop complaining.
So your basically paying $20 to use your own internet nice nintendo
EjamGaming MC EXACTLY!!!!!!!
EjamGaming MC exactly cause Nintendo now feels entitled to a portion of your internet bill if you own a Switch
Basically every game console online services, and that sucks
Nah you're paying to use their servers
Big difference
Im against paying for online support on consoles anyway.
Also add that Sony and Microsoft gives you some random games each month. While Nintendo special offers will probably be 5% off in some random game.
Sony and Microsoft give you 2 PS4/Xbox One games and 2 PS3 and Xbox 360 games a month while Nintendo gives you 20 35 year old games from a console no one really cares about these days
I'd hardly call it giving when you only get to play them as long as you have a sub active. It's also triple the price for the online and whether you already own the games they give out is another thing entirely.
They gave Bloodborne out somewhat recently which was pretty neat, shame I owned it already so I didn't really get anything out of that month.
Regardless about how you feel about the NES games, at least everyone gets something they wouldn't have otherwise.
@@ThatNormalBunny actually a lot of people care about NES games, they just don't post about it that much
5% off is already in all of their virtual console due to nintendo points
@@SammyDrz Then again, the NES games you get for the switch are also only usable while you're paying for the service. They should just go ahead and throw SNES and N64 games into the mix, and I'm sure a lot of people would be more than grateful to pay the 20 bucks just for the sake of playing those games.
Heck, I'd pay the 60 dollars just to able to play them, Nintendo is just sitting in a gold mine, apparently not knowing what to do with it.
Or they're just greedy and are waiting to release mini versions of all consoles.
Paid online play is anti consumer. End of discussion.
20 dollars IS A LOT OF MONEY FOR SOME PEOPLE. What about the kids that depend on their parents? what about the people on other countries where even a single game costs an absurd amount of money?
I hate the "it's not a lot of money" argument, because it only considers adult people on USA
I admit that last one bit may be generalizing a little, but I think my point is clear: not everyone is in the same economic situation, because of their job, family, age or country. Should we really strip them out of the online experience when they can't pay it easily?
Water It’s only 20 dollars. If they were able to spend 300 on the console, then a small yearly fee isn’t going to hurt them. Also, Nintendo isn’t even forcing you to pay for online, you can still play single player no problem. You people are just spoiled.
You completely missed my point. What if there are people who barely can pay for 2 games a year? I'm not one of them, but I know many friends who are.
Water If they can barely afford two games a year, then maybe they should be putting their money towards something more important than video games???
Of course they are. That's one of the reasons as to why they can't afford many games
nintendo can deal with online being free, just look at the past year...
that shows that free online is not a problem at all and its just the company thinking of a way to squeeze more money out of the consumers
Of course they can. Peer to peer servers cost next to nothing to run. It's why indie games and small companies utilize them. It's dedicated servers that cost money to keep up, which somewhat justifies paying money, but we're not getting those. We're just paying $20 every single year to play the games we already paid for on the console we already paid for with the internet connection we already paid for.
By this point with how little you get in exchange, and you literally pay for nothing, it's only fitting description is the "Nintendo tax."
+Damir Kalaz We are getting dedicated servers. For Smash, and Mario Kart. You know, the games that are popular. Not Splatoon. Get over it whiney bitch.
You mean, one game that doesn't necessarily need it and one that isn't even out yet? I don't know what you count as popular but Splatoon was in fact among some of the most popular and best sellers. *And is a shooter. Which could really use the servers instead.*
+Senderoth Trollinski
No, we're not. Read the text during that part of the video. I understand if reading is difficult for you at the age I assume you to be based on this reply, but it's clearly stated that this was from awhile ago, and may have even just been Reggie talking hypothetically. It has not be stated one way or the other that these two games or any others will be getting dedicated servers.
Sorry, is "hypothetically" too big of a word for you? Here, let me provide you with the definition just in case you don't know the URL to google:
"by imagining a possibility rather than reality; as a hypothesis."
And just in case "Imagining", "possibility", and "hypothesis" are also too big for you:
Imagining:
"form a mental image or concept of."
Possibility:
"a thing that may happen or be the case."
Hypothesis:
"a supposition or proposed explanation made on the basis of limited evidence as a starting point for further investigation."
And just in case that last one throws you for a loop:
Supposition:
"an uncertain belief."
Please actually pay attention and learn the facts before you decide to call someone a "whiny bitch". By the way, "whiny" doesn't have an e. Just pointing that out, because if you're going to insult someone, you should also at least spell it right, otherwise you're basically just insulting yourself.
Furthermore, you're suggesting that there is nothing to complain about in the scenario where MK8D gets dedicated servers prioritized over Splatoon 2. Splatoon 2 is more heavily impacted by the lack of dedicated servers than MK8D is, so if MK8D got dedicated servers and Splatoon 2 stayed as is, that would almost be *more* infuriating. Ideally, *all* first party multiplayer Nintendo games would offer dedicated servers, but if it has to only be a few, then it should be games that rely on connection quality the most.
Yeah, I can say this service doesnt give me diddly.
The price tag seems so attractive but then I asked 'what do I get for paying?' A better time online? More communication options? Wouldn't be hard to do. Or even a better, more reliable connection?
Nope. They offer cloud saves that dont help the games I like. Namely splatoon 2. And nes games. Nes. Games. What? Sony and microsoft now somehow trump nintendo online in value because I will at least get relevant features.
Just, how the heck after so many years does nintendo not have more roms to offer for emulation on their platform? $20 a year for access to everything gamecube and before would be pretty cool. A giant undertaking sure but that would get more value out of that old stock than piecemeal distribution of two to three remakes.
The fact they haven't done something to that extent just hits me with the feeling nintendo is doing the bare minimum to appease consumers about an additional online fee, for their notoriously awful online that is somehow even worse than wii's online.
SantaFire ` don’t forget taking down Emu paradise and other rom sites, now we will never be able to play Game cube games that will never get a port or rereleased again, so it seems that game conservation should still be done based on those measures since Nintendo threw out most of the roms for space a while ago.
Dataminers and homebrewers proved a long time ago that it would be virtually zero effort on nintendo's part to put every nes, snes, and n64 game they have the rights to on either the virtual console or switch online. I can see both sides of the argument for and against a streaming service version of the VC, but the fact of the matter is either way there is no excuse.
Let's start a riot if Sword and Shield don't have cloud save (R.I.P. to any future shiny mons lost in the switch)
It doesn’t, I lost them, FFFFFUCK ME
As you pointed out despite the poor value and anti consumer nature of it, people will still pay for it. A friend absolutely hates it but paid for it so she couldn't live without Splatoon 2.
Oh how will she ever recover...
NinjaRodent and that is the sad problem that Nintendo was counting on outside of their sheep cult
@@GILLIGFAN "sheep cult" _Surprisingly hilarious!_
That's why I paid for it.
NinjaRodent
Im fucking addicted to splatoon but im refusing to pay for the sake of consumers
not gonna lie
it actually is pretty bad
Toony about the lack of backup save point.... isn’t that what the SD card does? I don’t have a switch so I’m genuinely asking
No shit
Kyle Campbell the cloud saves are for if your sd card breaks, or if your switch crashes and corrupts your data, you can get a new switch and when you sign into the old account, you will still have your old progress. It takes BARELY any storage to hold a save file, and yet Nintendo barely offers any
The cloud should be free and not included in the online service
Why would you say something so controversial, yet so brave?
Nintendo charges extra for AC adapters for products that have rechargeable batteries.
Process that shit. Think about it. They're fucking greedy.
The word 'Nintendo' means greedy in a way that greedy cannot describe.
Sony has the same issue. (In part - Sony has local backups to go with it. Sony also has more comprehensive coverage of cloud backup)
+Joey Greathouse OH SHIT ! It's like Sony with the Playstation Classic ! Oh and SNK too with their own Neo Geo Classic. At least with 3DS A LOT of people already had the AC adapter so...
Besides every compagnies are greedy.
No the manual save backup should be an option. I think Cloud is a lot more different to manage since it's saved elsewhere and I bet that cost money to maintain.
My glob! This makes the Wii U’s virtual console look like a god!
I never thought i'd see the day...
I dont get why everyone thinks wii u is bullshit
BTS KPOP ARMY it was, but now it isn’t lol
HAHAHA! Have fun with your laggy iPads.
@@CarlosAlberto-nq3iv I will, playing Star Fox 64 and Super Metroid. Let me know when that's on Switch kthxbye
Splatoon 2 got done dirty. While the service probably won't die, I will do my best on my end not to support this shady shenanigans. By not buying it, and simply playing singleplayer games, or in the case of Smash, just play locally. With how the Switch functions in general, I really could just directly go to my friends house and game on right then and there.
That and historically, Smash online from the Brawl era still spooks me. Adding insult to injury, Smash 4 technically had a pretty decent online (compared to Brawl) and that was during the Wii U era when online was free.
The Switch is an amazing concept and I would like the concept to develop further. I'll support that. But as for the software side of things, online multiplayer games plus the service they use are a no go on my end. Also its Nintendo, so odds are I'll be spoiled for choice on the singleplayer front. It is a little disappointing, but the most I can do is just not buy into it. While it does suck to have a bunch of options of games to be cut on my end, thats how the market works.
Your wallet, your choice. That choice, is a "vote" of sorts. If you put your choices elsewhere, you're effectively voting for some other product.
Also Bayonetta 3 is on the way, and if its good (can't rule out every possibility now can we?), I'll add that to the list of singleplayer games to play. While my decisions won't make a difference, at least I can feel like it is.
That’s basically what I’m doing and I think it’s a good way to be about this ( don’t let some whiny insulting little kid make you feel otherwise)
+Firenze 64 reason for that last part was some ijit insulting me for saying the same thing you did
They're doing everything in their power to make me want to pay for online and I really do. The new weapons, subs, stages, SPECIALS, and the 48 HOUR SPLATFEST. I'm this close to tipping over the edge.
+Omega019283 that’s just it all that effort for paid multiplayer only while the main game suffers ! It’s why I refuse to pay for this poop
You know how it goes. The consumer votes with their wallet. Every one person that doesn't pay for NSO does go noticed in the long run.
I do think if the ENTIRETY of the community went with a cold "nope" for about a month or two; Nintendo would have backpedaled. Though that's a theoretical nigh-impossibility all things considered.
Does anyone think that Arlo is like a mini intelligent Cookie Monster?
His more well-spoken, game-loving brother hehe
I think that is part of the joke...
The mini part is debatable though I've never really seen a comparative size of the two.
He's a failed Cookie Monster clone, but since Cookie Monster was already... incompetent, Arlo turned out superior in every way except for sheer Tard strength.
Imagine Arlo being a special guest in an episode of Sesame Street lmao. That’d be funny as hell!
How to improve it
Remove it
Get rid of the service or paying for it?
@@imonly1070 nah just get rid of paying to play online, PC does this without a second fee, I already pay for my internet.
@@imonly1070 lol I guess paying $150 for internet is me being poor, you can't defend this shit and you know it.
The Fiercest of Deities he can't, he already went for the stupidest cop out argument, as If this only had to do with money and not common sense.
Imonly10 Strawman? you actually believe we should be paying for a service that is literally worse in every respect from last gen?!!
I feel it's weird that Luigi's balloon world works without switch online.
ThisChannelHasNoName Luigi’s secretly on strike.
wait, it does?! I was getting all sad that it had to be used with online, but then I hear this!
ThisChannelHasNoName are you sure?
The reason it's absurd for online to cost extra is that it doesn't take as much maintenance as you'd imagine. Most games aren't hosted on servers they set up. If we play a game together, we are connecting directly to each other, and Nintendo has nothing to do with it. It's called a peer to peer(p2p) connection. My parents firewall blocks p2p connections, so I can easily tell when a game is running p2p and most switch game use it. They are literally charging for us to connect directly with each other. Steam at least helps out if needed. They have some extra features to intermediate a p2p connection if needed. It's a far better service, ignoring the price altogether.
Plus we pay for the console and game isn’t that enough
He explained P2P just as well in the video
+Dr. G&W but he doens't truly understand Peer to peer, how Sony, MS, Nintendo aren't always playing for online, third party games its done by that company example Ubisoft
sorry he needs research online play more
@@DrGandW lol, yeah. I stopped the video 4 minutes in to answer his retorical questions. The exact moment I pressed play after posting, he went right into p2p. I didn't expect that.
People say "it's not alot of money whats the problem" but when it lacks the most simple online feature like messaging and party chat and apps then yes its not worth it
JUGGERNAUT KI11 ikr fucking fanboys
Whenever people say that, all I have to say is this: Just because there's a less expensive alternative doesn't mean that said alternative is necessarily good.
Everyone complaining about no Splatoon 2 Cloud saves...
Me: NO 1-2 SWITCH CLOUD SAVES?
Gannon Schlader THIS IS UNACCEPTABLE!!!
You actually played the tech demo and want cloud saves for it? Please tell me you stoned and typing.
MY EATING CONTEST HIGH SCORE COULD BE LOST FOREVER!
@@Openreality r/woooosh
I had enough. Literally yesterday I thought that I'm gonna buy a Switch instead of an Xbox One X because it's online isn't for free. And now this! Why do companies do that???! We buy their *expensive* consoles and accessories only to receive this?! I had my hopes high but now...
Contrary to what some people believe, Servers aren't a magical fix.
Its mostly just a convenient excuse. Just like how people in Splatoon 2 like to complain about tick rate when 99% of the time its not a factor in any of their problems.
When you say "It all comes down to how good each players internet is" Servers don't change that. Its not going to improve your connection with your opponents, in fact its going to make your ping with other players worse.
All servers do is add some extra negotiation steps that can help the game appear to run better, and clear up conflicting information.
Throttling your speed is still a thing even with servers.
The BIGGEST reason for having servers is for input verification and security, not necessarily for gameplay.
To expect nintendo to move all their games to dedicated servers for a measly $20 a year is irrational. That was never ever ever even on the table to begin with.
We are stuck with P2P, and I don't really expect Smash or MK to use dedicated servers either despite what Reggie said. He was talking about infrastructure, and not necessarily commenting at all on P2P vs Dedicated gameplay servers.
IN ADDITION...
P2P vs Dedicated servers is ONLY addressing gameplay servers.
This does not address matchmaking servers, or servers dedicated on running security by monitoring games, and it does not address services like Miiverse, flipnote hattena or in-game events.
Lastly, 1V1 games SHOULD be P2P. They just all should.
Its soooo frustrating playing say... fortnite playgrounds with 1 other person ( or even by yourself ) and suffering issues in the game due to server connectivity or server load. Thats Asinine.
P2P works VERY well for 1v1 games, and has virtually no drawbacks.
id rather be playing better games on the wii u than buying online service
since I can't play splatoon 2 i'm gonna play splatoon 1, if I still can that is, I haven't heard any news about diabling wii u online yet but hey ho we'll see
No i still have my wii u and splatoon and the others work well
@Mr.Mesican They know crossplay, just with Xbox and Playstation.
@Mr.Mesican that's not cross-platform at all though.
LOOOOOL the Wii u
I disagree that sony/microsoft or nintendo should charge for online. Firstly, Sony and Microsoft do not pay for the servers for the third-party games, Ubisoft pays for the servers in Ubisoft games and so on. Additionally, they are charging for features of games that WE ALREADY PAID FOR. If you buy a game like Rainbow Six Siege, where there's almost no singleplayer content, that means they want you to pay 60 Dollars per year to basically play the game you already paid 60 Dollars for. You also wouldn't call Battlefield or Call of Duty a full game without Multiplayer.
Yeah they get their profit from the game! THE THING WE ALREADY PAID FOR ARLO!
@@firenze6424 exactly it's called the cost of doing business I honestly regret getting the switch it's games are lack luster and I would of never agreed to the pay wall internet service if I knew it was peer to peer.
Yeah, Arlo's argument was full of the exact same arguments I see people defending paid online that both don't understand how the online works (namely, that it's peer-to-peer and there ARE no servers people are paying for) and that "It's a business" is not a magic end-all excuse to justify something. The Epipen price hike was "just business", but pretty much everyone feels it was a horrible move. Nevermind the fact that his argument for Steam could also be used for online for consoles, namely that they would also want a larger userbase of online players because then more people will buy their online games. I refuse to pay for online for my console, and because of that, games such as Splatoon 2 are completely off my radar and I won't consider purchasing, and fighting games I am buying on PC instead.
why clearly Arlo has no clue what he's talking about, he should do some research about how online play works, bottom line none of console makers should be charging customers the online service its bullshit
Agreed, none of them should charge for online. I am not just critical of Nintendo over this, but all of them. They can go ahead and charge for all the other stuff, cloud saves, discounts, giveaways, etc... but not their peer-to-peer online. The reason the only change Sony did from PSN on the PS3 to the PS4 was to toss online behind the paywall because they knew that would get far more to pay for it JUST for the online, despite online costing them nothing.
Also, as Arlo mentioned, cloud saves either should be free (Like Xbox and Steam do) or they can go ahead and charge for them..... *IF* we have a free alternative like the PS4 and previous Nintendo systems did.
I KNOW
every one stop paying for nintendo online and for a month or 2 (yes i know its long) and nintendo will stop making nintendo online a thing!!!
it may suck but its all worth the wait...
like if you agree ...
raybriel mundo unfortunately it is a trend that is going to continue in the entertainment industry unless the government stops it like loot boxes. With smash coming out with their ranking online system, it’s pretty close to impossible if you are a competitive players including games like splatoon 2 and Dragonball fighters. They probably will try to improve the service but not anytime soon from what we see
You two are some truly special children
I have a brand new Nintendo Switch console for a very low price. Go here to get it: HootSwitch.xyz
raybriel mundo Actually no they won’t lol. They can care less whether people actually play on Nintendo Online. They still get money from all the games purchased every single day. $20 for online from people doesn’t matter to them. They still make insane amounts of money and there will always be people on the online service
@@AdolisYT you clearly don't know just how much money nintendo made with NSO. It is not just a drop in the bucket. The made billions on release.
eeeyup
TheLonelyGoomba
.
Goomba Gamer because he is a popular youtuber
I think you mean BUP
Hi Goomba.
TheLonelyGoomba whatup
The Switches Online Service is a disgrace. It might be at a third of the price of the other two, but you're also only getting like 1/20th of the service they have. Nintendo's Online experience has always been the least comfortable and least functional, but since it was free it was somewhat acceptable. Dedicated servers don't make sense for all games (ie it wouldn't make sense to run servers for the 2-player NES-Games) but games like Splatoon would benefit massively (though given how the game appears to be coded, it would still be a mess if all they did was introduce proper dedicated servers to it). Nintendo if you want me to pay for your online service you need to fix your games online modes, you need to be willing to invest into an infrastructure including servers, you need to offer games that are worth a subscription, you need to make your online system comfortable and well integrated with the firmware and software, you need to be transparent about what you're doing and what you're planning to do and probably most importantly you need to stop doing shitty business practice like removing the feature to backup your saves locally only so that a few more people feel forced to pay your online service that I predict to flop horribly. If you're disappointed with the service I suggest you to not buy it. If enough people refuse to pay for a shitty service Nintendo might realize there's something wrong with it.
Yeah, online has never really been Nintendo's strong suit. They should get some technicians who actually know a thing or two about network infrastructure.
I agree, and I haven't purchased the service myself, mostly because of Splatoon 2. With that being said, what did you mean when you said "given how the game appears to be coded"?
The sad thing is that even if the service was successfully boycotted, Nintendo would probably interpret that as people not wanting online at all, and we still get less. So many of their games would be 10x better with competent online features. It’s such a shame.
I'm not buying it, It's an anti-consumer product like Playstation Plus and XBOX Live Gold and whatnot.
Martino Fontana or more accurately someone kills you but because your network is slower you die out of thin air for no reason then they appear in front of you out of nowhere or they shoot and kill you through a wall on your screen then the move around the wall and start shooting again. Like in pubg when the internet speeds are different between players.
Payed Online is wrong, especially for Sony and Microsoft because the majority of games played online on the systems are third party games, third party games where the servers are hosted and maintained by the *third parties*. This means that for the most part, Sony and Microsoft are just pocketing money that they didn't deserve. And with the case of them hosting servers being expensive there is a pretty simple solution, you pay a subscription for access to all the other content and features and if you don't pay, you only have access to peer to peer multiplayer rather than dedicated servers. It makes it way more forgiving than having to pay a subscription just to send information back and forth on internet connections that we already pay for.
i'm pretty sure they don't even pay for the severs of the first party games since they didn't make them they just funded them unlike Nintendo, even tho Nintendo doesn't pay for their first party servers either because they are player to player
Paid*
Not to mention you can't even *play* Tetris 99 if you don't have Nintendo Online!
Which defeats the purpose of free.
isn't there a single-player paid dlc for it tho?
@@MinePlayersPE Yep.
That's right folks, we live in a world where you can get Tetris for free. *_But have to pay money in order to play it the way it was meant to be._*
@@CaptainCFalcon you get a MULTIPLAYER version for free
The single player is charged like it has almost always been
@@aki-lucky8345 What about my original comment didn't make sense to you? I said there's a Tetris that we get for free.
But in order to play it like Tetris has always been played, you have to actually pay.
From what it seems like, any switch game with a decent or even partially competitive online functionality will not support Cloud saves. If this is true, I'm willing to bet next year's Pokemon game will also not support it.
With Pokemon, I suspect that they don't want you to dupe your Pokemon. Notably, the VC Pokemon games don't support the save state that every other VC game does. Save backups basically allow you to dupe the same one as much as you want.
Of course, I don't think that it's a good reason if that is why they are doing it...
The Pokemon games have already been shown to not have cloud saves. They claim it's to prevent cheating, but the problem is, to modify a save the way they thing you will, you need a hacked Switch anyway, so it's entirely pointless.
They probably have save data in the carts like usual. Cpt Toad Treasure Tracker didn't need any download. And it has save data on the cart. Pokemon has historically made save files on the carts of their games, so I'm not surprised.
E Smo I’m pretty confident that I’d Let’s Go won’t support cloud saves that any Pokémon game that goes on switch won’t
These things tend to be standardized even if it’s a bad choice on Nintendo’s part
Yupp, because Gamefreak has always done a great job at preventing cloning, copying, duping, and hacking in Pokemon, I'm sure that no cloud saves is all they need to do to prevent the game from getting hacked almost instantly.... again.
special offers: pays you $20 a year
me: it all makes sense now 😅
I don't mind the cheap price,
I mind the lackluster features which I don't really want, thereby paywalling internet when PS4 offers tenfold the value.
I know some people get super excited for NES games but its 2018, they could throw some SNES and N64 titles in.
PS4 might have a better value in most opinions and be doing better with data backup, but I'm still not paying an extra $60 a year for it.
I mean, fine if people like it, but I'm kinda with Arlo on thinking that's a steep price just to play the games online and while the PS+ freebies are a nice thought, they tend to be games that I either have no interest in or games that I did have interest in so I bought them a year ago.
Still not paying for NSO unless things get better and the data backup gets less scummy.
Here is what I feel would be a better way to do this whole Nintendo Switch Online thing.
All games released prior to it's launch should have kept their free online play, rather than just the non-Nintendo games. This way, games like Smash and the next big Pokemon game that has competitive battling are incentives to buy online, but people who bought Splatoon or Mario Kart aren't being given the finger.
Release bundles of free games through Online. Sure, maybe they start with the 10 or whatever that is available, but then every so often they could release some more classics, starting with all of the big NES titles and then moving to the SNES, N64, Gamecube and Wii. Heck, even some Gameboy and DS ports would be nice. Imagine playing Pokemon Platinum on a Switch?!
super goron i'm with you on that. At the very VERY least, allow people to transfer a local save onto an SD card. nothing says anti-consumer like limiting your ability to port saves onto an sd card
At just a third of the price a third of the benefits is fair. This doesn’t reach a fifth.
I was so used to just connecting to the internet for free on my 3DS, now if I want to race my friend online in Mario Kart I have to pay just to use the intetnet.
Mario kart 7 and smash 4 were the best things I played with friends and I hate that now nintendo is being stingy and is caring more about money rather than the dedicated fans
Welcome to Season 2 of Arlo Talks About Nintendo's Bad Decisions!
Alternate title thats fitting:
"Nintendo Switch Online Hurts Me."
honestly NES games havent aged well at all
That varies largely from game to game, but they really should have had something else; most children nowadays won't want to play NES games, especially not shit like Tennis.
Hooded Man the only game they have on the service that I would want to play would be super mario bros 3
White-Van Helsing I haven’t played many snes games just allittle bit of mario world tbh
in my opinion, N64 hasn't aged well either, but nostalgia drives us.
i agree that SOME N64 games havent aged well like mario kart 64 but others have aged great like mario party 2
The argument that online shouldn't be free isn't an argument I agree with, but it's an argument I can understand. It comes from a reasonable place for sure.
But Nintendo's online is legitimately extortion.