Why is online in this game so bad?

[Wobblerbox]

NAT type is A still ****

 

[1FC0]

THIS is why is trash why the **** would he have to configure our router while every other online game on switch like splatoon or MK8 just work perfect c'mon I agree with OP the online is garbage please nintendo fix

Probably because SSBU is peer to peer and it uses one of the players as host while your examples use a dedicated Nintendo server as host. Since this reduces lag in 1v1 matches in SSBU I want them to do it this way.

 

[OmegaLurker]

Probably because SSBU is peer to peer and it uses one of the players as host while your examples use a dedicated Nintendo server as host. Since this reduces lag in 1v1 matches in SSBU I want them to do it this way.

We pay for online service Nintendo SHOULD use dedicated server and Splatoon 2 and MK8 use P2P and I don't have any issues

 

[1FC0]

We pay for online service Nintendo SHOULD use dedicated server and Splatoon 2 and MK8 use P2P and I don't have any issues

It seems that you are right about MK8 and Splatoon 2 being P2P. When I had the wrong NAT type I had problems with Smash4, Luigi's Mansion 2, and SSBU, which happen to be the only games I played online. So SSBU is not unique. But I find it strange that MK8 and Splatoon 2 which are also P2P would not cause problems.

 

[meleebrawler]

No matter what anyone has to say about the matchmaking and how much it annoys them to not always get the game they asked for, it'll always feel like a weak argument on it's own as long as arenas exist. Everything I hear against those seems either based on laziness ("shouldn't have to do this"), impatience ("takes too long to find people or wait in line", doubly ironic when they also claim they would prefer to wait more to get the game they want) or just plain glossing over it to make matchmaking seem worse than it is. As long as arenas are 100% accurate with your rules, quickplay doesn't really need to be.

What is the more pressing issue with quickplay at the moment, is how it handles GSP. Lumping all the different modes into the same one certainly isn't the most accurate reflection of one's skill given the vastly different strategies needed between them. If there was a separate GSP for free-for-alls, 1v1s and doubles, not only will they be able to track dominant strategies in each more easily, but players will also be less incentivized to quit when they get a mode they don't care for, since it'll only impact a GSP they don't care about. A nice compromise between preferring certain modes and keeping everyone in the same queue for speed, alongside the guaranteed and rank-free arenas.

 

[Dan]

No matter what anyone has to say about the matchmaking and how much it annoys them to not always get the game they asked for, it'll always feel like a weak argument on it's own as long as arenas exist. Everything I hear against those seems either based on laziness ("shouldn't have to do this"), impatience ("takes too long to find people or wait in line", doubly ironic when they also claim they would prefer to wait more to get the game they want) or just plain glossing over it to make matchmaking seem worse than it is. As long as arenas are 100% accurate with your rules, quickplay doesn't really need to be.

This is so true, because watching two tokens collide back and forth for 15 minutes is the ideal way to play Smash online.

 

[Sunredo]

This is so true, because watching two tokens collide back and forth for 15 minutes is the ideal way to play Smash online.

Then why not try and get into an arena with a max of 2 then?

 

[Wyoming]

The matchmaking definitely needs fixing. Preferred rules are being ignored, plan and simple.

Arenas are great. I love them, but they shouldn't be the main mode. It is a great option to have, but it has small issues that need tweaking to work efficiently. Host migration is the big one. There's no reason that the whole room should be destroyed because one person leaves. Migrate the host to the one with the next best connection.

Then there's the waiting times. Attempting to join a two-person arena is futile since many people will be trying to get in at once. There SHOULD be a way to have two fights at the same time if there's more than 4 people in the room.

Quickplay is fine. You have to treat it as it is...a quick way to play the game. Keep in mind this system is also a handheld and most likely built for people who travel and just want to jump in. If you go there then you don't care where you end up. That is its purpose.

Luckily there is a patch coming up. Hopefully the algorithm is the main dish being served from that.

 

[meleebrawler]

Then why not try and get into an arena with a max of 2 then?

Yeah, I don't really get why you'd ever do more than 4 unless playing doubles. Even in 1v1s, if I ever allow more than 2 I'll make sure to use shorter formats like 2-stock to keep things moving.

You can't even claim arenas are a pain to set up each time because the same rulesets you create and save offline can be used to make arenas.

 

[Wyoming]

Yeah, I don't really get why you'd ever do more than 4 unless playing doubles. Even in 1v1s, if I ever allow more than 2 I'll make sure to use shorter formats like 2-stock to keep things moving.

You can't even claim arenas are a pain to set up each time because the same rulesets you create and save offline can be used to make arenas.

Yes but the number amount of people trying to join these arenas is high. When Smash 4 had For Glory tournaments they filled up 32 or 64 slots within 3 seconds.

 

[Wyoming]

We pay for online service Nintendo SHOULD use dedicated server and Splatoon 2 and MK8 use P2P and I don't have any issues

Mario Kart actually hides the lag it gets most of the time. You can see racers teleport ahead or behind you as the game attempts to catch up.

Not sure about Splatoon, but my previous experience with shooters tells me they pull the same tricks. You can't do that in a fighting game, so it is more noticeable.

 

[Wobblerbox]

Mario Kart actually hides the lag it gets most of the time. You can see racers teleport ahead or behind you as the game attempts to catch up.

Not sure about Splatoon, but my previous experience with shooters tells me they pull the same tricks. You can't do that in a fighting game, so it is more noticeable.

True, but atleast when you play mario cart online it feels like you're still playing the same game. Smash online turns into a weird guessing game of were is he going next instead of actually playing neutral.

 

[Elegant]

I'm pretty disappointed with Online too; however, reading the title of the thread I didn't realize you were talking about connection. I thought you were talking about THE RANDOM FFA MATCHES THE GAME PUTS YOU INTO WHEN WANTING TO DO 1v1 GAH

 

[Dan]

Yep, as Wyoming said it's a mad dash that 50% of the time results in an error message.

 

[GhostYB]

We got an update coming!

 

[Its-a-Mina]

Playing online so far has not been a good experience, I want 1v1 battlefield or Omega, instead let's get free for alls with items on...


The biggest reason why I would like to see a 1v1 back is because on a FREE FOR ALL I feet paired with with a fox, k tool and palutena the fox finally loses all three stocks so it's me and the other two which even then they both gang up on me for it being a free for all like literally they would walk right next to each other and not hit each other but the moment I get in the middle they then go after me at the same time...
Luckily we timed out and I got in second so I didn't lose my GSP

Nintendo needs to fix this system so nobody gets paired up with people who does this **** and actually make the game fair again.... For glory had nothing wrong with it... Just the players and the awful lag.

 

[Kookie]

I just don't understand how this game's net code can be so trash in a world with so many fighting games that get it right.

Stop giving this company a pass for god's sake.

 

[Idon]

I cannot believe that someway... somehow... Nintendo has gone backwards from Smash 4 online in every single conceivable way.

And on top of all that, now they're asking us to pay for it.

Jesus ****ing christ.

 

[Deleted member]

I just tried a few matches. As a casual fan that doesn't care about the rules I've had fun with it, even if the latency sucks monkey doodoo.

That said, the fact that preferred rules aren't taken more aggressively into account by matchmaking is severely disappointing. I hope Nintendo will fix that soon, either by giving a new option of "these rules only" or tightening the current one up a bit.

Yet to try arena lobbies though. I wanna have a knack at that with some friends across the sea and check how awful the lag will be. lmao

 

[Sunredo]

Funny how out of all the things that could use a buff in this game it’s the online that needs it the most.

Anyway, I agree with Wyoming on pretty much everything. Already stated a couple of the things he brought up in a spoiler a page or two back so it would be kinda suspect for me disagree now. I know I look like I'm sugar coating Arenas, but there are more problems with Arenas than there are with Quickplay. I do believe that after everything is sorted out with online Arenas will be the best way to play competitively in sessions assuming Nintendo does end up tweaking it the way most are asking. However things like multiple people not being able to fight eachother in an Arena despite their being other fighting games that were on unreal 3, used p2p,and had a very similar function to arenas allowing you to do so, really bring it down as it is now.

 

[ZaneHitsurugi]

No matter what anyone has to say about the matchmaking and how much it annoys them to not always get the game they asked for, it'll always feel like a weak argument on it's own as long as arenas exist. Everything I hear against those seems either based on laziness ("shouldn't have to do this"), impatience ("takes too long to find people or wait in line", doubly ironic when they also claim they would prefer to wait more to get the game they want) or just plain glossing over it to make matchmaking seem worse than it is. As long as arenas are 100% accurate with your rules, quickplay doesn't really need to be.

What is the more pressing issue with quickplay at the moment, is how it handles GSP. Lumping all the different modes into the same one certainly isn't the most accurate reflection of one's skill given the vastly different strategies needed between them. If there was a separate GSP for free-for-alls, 1v1s and doubles, not only will they be able to track dominant strategies in each more easily, but players will also be less incentivized to quit when they get a mode they don't care for, since it'll only impact a GSP they don't care about. A nice compromise between preferring certain modes and keeping everyone in the same queue for speed, alongside the guaranteed and rank-free arenas.

Drone detected.
Arenas are not a substitute for quickplay. Its not lazy to want the game to actually work with you when getting into a match.
Its not impatient to want to run sets quickly. Arenas themselves are subpar as well, as said before. You can't even change characters without being dropped out of the line.
The fact that nintendo "fans" keep defending sub-par quality products is how we got to this point in the first place. Online matchmaking is as it should be on other consoles, yet these fools didn't even attempt to make good matchmaking.

 

[meleebrawler]

I cannot believe that someway... somehow... Nintendo has gone backwards from Smash 4 online in every single conceivable way.

And on top of all that, now they're asking us to pay for it.

Jesus ****ing christ.

I would agree with this if arenas were with friends only. As it is you can have fully customized rulesets with randoms, something no other Smash game has allowed.

And to anyone who calls me a drone or "white knight"... all I'm trying to do is identify issues that can't be worked around, because those are the ones most likely to be fixed if attention is brought to them. Can you honestly say, if you walked up to a dev with your matchmaking complaints without bringing anything else up, would they take it seriously knowing about the arena mode they devised? Making a big stink about it might work, but when dealing with companies known for being set in their ways, your best bet is to try and see things their way, what they're trying to do, THEN offer criticism on how they can better achieve their goals.

As many others have said, arenas are a great concept that just need a few adjustments to truly live up to their full potential. And while more accurate matchmaking would be appreciated, the main thing that needs to be addressed is how it handles ranking. They wanna use Elite Smash to judge balance changes they need across all modes, they need to understand each main mode of play has vastly different strategies needed to win that don't always translate from one to the other.

 

[ChikoLad]

Just as an FYI, please stop telling people to "get a LAN Adapter". Nintendo only tells you that because it's a product they want you to buy so they can have more money.

While it's true that a LAN adapter may help some people, what's more important if you're a Wi-Fi user is to check your internet speeds and ping first.

In my case, my max download speed is 100mbps, and my max upload speed is 20mbps. Typically on my computer (my Switch is on the same unit), running a speed test gets me 70-80mbps download and 18-19mbps upload. My ping is usually 8 to 12. That's more than good enough for any online game and then some. I'm probably still getting much faster speeds than a lot of my opponents who are using LAN Adapters.

The only online games that ever give me issues are P2P. It's because other people have bad connections.

So yeah before worrying about a LAN Adapter, make sure to check your internet speeds and such. If you're internet is already super slow than the LAN Adapter won't help, but if it's an issue with your Wi-fi connection being inconsistent, it may help. I myself tried a LAN Adapter on Wii U but it didn't improve my experience because my internet speed was never the issue, it was other people's internet speeds.

That being said, connection wise, my experience with Smash Ultimate has mostly been good.

 

[Ghidorah14]

Yeah, this is straight garbage, lol. Elite smash is some BS as well.

"You unlocked elite smash!"
What, already? I just started playing online...

-gets absolutely destroyed by sweaty tryhards who I have no business being matched with-

"You can no longer play elite smash!"
GOOD.

 

[Sunredo]

Just as an FYI, please stop telling people to "get a LAN Adapter". Nintendo only tells you that because it's a product they want you to buy so they can have more money.

Already made a post a couple days or so ago about how you shouldn't buy a Nintendo LAN adapter because you can get a much better one for $10 - $15. The reasons why LAN connections are always recommended for fighting games, or online games in general, is because it lowers your ping. The lower the ping, the lower the latency, and the lower the latency, the better the connection. Of course run a test of ping to see if you should get a LAN adapter or not, but it's a fact that LAN is always more consistent than WiFi in most cases. You probably didn't see much of a difference simply cause you got a consistent connection and/or you used the Nintendo one which is terrible.

This isn't really aimed at a specific person but it's so weird seeing all of these people have complaints with LAN whenever the FGC and other communities has been recommending them for years. These discussions people keep bringing up about LAN connections has already been talked about in other even older forums long lost and forgotten. LAN will lower the amount of latency you get as you're playing a game online, and in addition, it's more consistent for most people. That's all there is to it. Nintendo recommending their LAN adapter when it's at that terrible quality is something to be upset about. However swatting away the idea of going LAN at all when you're having problems with lag is just confusing to me. I get that some really just can't because of where they live but if you have a ping of 2000 or something then you probably should get to finding a local instead imo.

 

[Coolboy]

i will never understand this..why does nintendo wants us to downgrade to wired internet cause they refuse to spend money on fixing it? isn't it known by now that wifi is the thing everyone uses?
so if you make something then make sure it goes well with wifi..what nintendo does is just lazy cause they actually mean ''we are to lazy to fix it and we hate spending money so you people should just play with wired internet end of discussion'' they don't say it like that but that's what they actually mean -.- it is not our job to fix it but NINTENDO should be FIXING IT, i will continue using wifi cause i refuse to downgrade.

 

[Idon]

i will never understand this..why does nintendo wants us to downgrade to wired internet cause they refuse to spend money on fixing it? isn't it known by now that wifi is the thing everyone uses?
so if you make something then make sure it goes well with wifi..what nintendo does is just lazy cause they actually mean ''we are to lazy to fix it and we hate spending money so you people should just play with wired internet end of discussion'' they don't say it like that but that's what they actually mean -.- it is not our job to fix it but NINTENDO should be FIXING IT, i will continue using wifi cause i refuse to downgrade.

No, that's not... that's not how WiFi works.

Nintendo's online is bad, yes, but a LAN adapter improves on online whether its good or bad.
Any company, whether they have the best online on the planet or the worse, would recommend you get a wire. It's just, STRAIGHT UP, better.

 

[ChikoLad]

Already made a post a couple days or so ago about how you shouldn't buy a Nintendo LAN adapter because you can get a much better one for $10 - $15. The reasons why LAN connections are always recommended for fighting games, or online games in general, is because it lowers your ping. The lower the ping, the lower the latency, and the lower the latency, the better the connection. Of course run a test of ping to see if you should get a LAN adapter or not, but it's a fact that LAN is always more consistent than WiFi in most cases. You probably didn't see much of a difference simply cause you got a consistent connection and/or you used the Nintendo one which is terrible.

This isn't really aimed at a specific person but it's so weird seeing all of these people have complaints with LAN whenever the FGC and other communities has been recommending them for years. These discussions people keep bringing up about LAN connections has already been talked about in other even older forums long lost and forgotten. LAN will lower the amount of latency you get as you're playing a game online, and in addition, it's more consistent for most people. That's all there is to it. Nintendo recommending their LAN adapter when it's at that terrible quality is something to be upset about. However swatting away the idea of going LAN at all when you're having problems with lag is just confusing to me. I get that some really just can't because of where they live but if you have a ping of 2000 or something then you probably should get to finding a local instead imo.

I'm aware of how it works, that's why I'm saying people need to check their ping and internet speeds. It wasn't making a difference for me because 8 ping is pretty much next to nothing. My experience with the game has mostly been pretty solid so I'd attribute any laggy matches to someone else having a bad connection, same as with any other P2P game I've played. I've heard people using LAN Adapters still having problems which in those cases would be because of their own poor internet speeds. A LAN Adapter won't help if you are at a 1mbps download and 500kbps upload, at that point you simply need better internet.

 

[WorDtheOnE]

I would say the docking station should have a LAN port on it's own. It's the same thing with the joygrip and the missing option to load you're controller.. why we need to buy things that should be included? I would be fine if we had to pay a little bit more but have the whole thing ready to go and nothing to worry later.

 

[Wyoming]

Played 3 Quickplay matches with preferred rules (Battlefield, items off, 1v1, 3 stocks, 7 minutes)

First match nearly got it right. It was certainly no items, 3 stocks and 7 mins on Pirate Ship's Battlefield form...but with 4 players. The latency was inconsistent; going from smooth to stuttering. I somehow win against a Little Mac, Toon Link, and a Ike. Not an enjoyable experience, however.

Second match gets it right: all the rules I want against a Pit on Battlefield 3D Land. Latency was good, but the opponent was easy to bait and punish. I can't complain though since this was only my 2nd "ranked" match. Not an enjoyable experience but not because of the system's fault.

Third battle: The rules are once again correct. Battlefield WarioWare against a Palutena. The skill gap between us was already noticeable as I got bopped 2-0 with the 2nd stock at 34.6%. Not an enjoyable experience and I felt discouraged. Latency was good.

Kind of left after that due to bad play/not feeling suitably prepared.

Overall it wasn't fun despite winning twice. The algorithm worked and the latency was good for me 2/3. It has something to do with the time I played (12-1am EST). In past online experiences I always got the best games in those late timespans. Probably because people's connections aren't being interrupted by other appliances in their home.

However the ranking system is complete ass. It's funny to think Mario Kart Wii had a much better ranking system. It remains the best system they've had that I've played, in truth.

Yeah there's Arenas, and I did that...but it has no ranking system despite being able to somewhat filter that out. Anything Goes is probably the best bet someone who's trying to learn the game can have without being stomped, but then you might see weak players being your opponent due to the filter's leniency.

I am still playing this game as if it was Smash 4 which doesn't help the experience, but it's only via online that I can personally get better. I need a good matchmaking system to do that.

 

[meleebrawler]

Played 3 Quickplay matches with preferred rules (Battlefield, items off, 1v1, 3 stocks, 7 minutes)

First match nearly got it right. It was certainly no items, 3 stocks and 7 mins on Pirate Ship's Battlefield form...but with 4 players. The latency was inconsistent; going from smooth to stuttering. I somehow win against a Little Mac, Toon Link, and a Ike. Not an enjoyable experience, however.

Second match gets it right: all the rules I want against a Pit on Battlefield 3D Land. Latency was good, but the opponent was easy to bait and punish. I can't complain though since this was only my 2nd "ranked" match. Not an enjoyable experience but not because of the system's fault.

Third battle: The rules are once again correct. Battlefield WarioWare against a Palutena. The skill gap between us was already noticeable as I got bopped 2-0 with the 2nd stock at 34.6%. Not an enjoyable experience and I felt discouraged. Latency was good.

Kind of left after that due to bad play/not feeling suitably prepared.

Overall it wasn't fun despite winning twice. The algorithm worked and the latency was good for me 2/3. It has something to do with the time I played (12-1am EST). In past online experiences I always got the best games in those late timespans. Probably because people's connections aren't being interrupted by other appliances in their home.

However the ranking system is complete ***. It's funny to think Mario Kart Wii had a much better ranking system. It remains the best system they've had that I've played, in truth.

Yeah there's Arenas, and I did that...but it has no ranking system despite being able to somewhat filter that out. Anything Goes is probably the best bet someone who's trying to learn the game can have without being stomped, but then you might see weak players being your opponent due to the filter's leniency.

I am still playing this game as if it was Smash 4 which doesn't help the experience, but it's only via online that I can personally get better. I need a good matchmaking system to do that.

At the launch of a game, noobs and pros alike start at the bottom, so it's always a bit of a cluster**** until everyone plays enough games to get properly settled in their place. Think of how many new players in Pokken Tournament DX got bopped by pros migrating from the Wii U version. Or there's always the possibility of one honing their skills extensively without ever going online, so when they finally do they're obviously way better than average player around them until they get their rank up.

 

[Wyoming]

Yes, I know that. I've played online games before, believe it or not.

But I couldn't rematch the Palutena with another character who is more suited to counter her due to their design choices. So i had to leave and was discouraged from finding another match that might give me another bad MU.

 

[Deleted member]

Is there even any way to search for pub arenas with a max of 2 players?

 

[meleebrawler]

Yes, I know that. I've played online games before, believe it or not.

But I couldn't rematch the Palutena with another character who is more suited to counter her due to their design choices. So i had to leave and was discouraged from finding another match that might give me another bad MU.

You don't get good with characters you play by avoiding bad matchups. Besides, GSP being tracked by character means there isn't incentive to switch to avoid tanking a global one. It also prevents players from using a character with low GSP to bait weaker players so they can stomp them with their real main.

And we don't have one GSP for all characters because otherwise no one would want to switch off of their best character, and Elite Smash would be dominated by top tiers who get nerfed for it.

 

[Wyoming]

You don't get good with characters you play by avoiding bad matchups. Besides, GSP being tracked by character means there isn't incentive to switch to avoid tanking a global one. It also prevents players from using a character with low GSP to bait weaker players so they can stomp them with their real main.

And we don't have one GSP for all characters because otherwise no one would want to switch off of their best character, and Elite Smash would be dominated by top tiers who get nerfed for it.

Bad MUs put you at a disadvantage. I want to rematch this person with someone that I feel will give me a better experience whilst facing them. Yes I could try again to improve the bad match-up, but I also would like to gauge my options.

Also what's wrong with that? If people want to use one character a lot but then switch they shouldn't be penalized with weaker opponents when they want to spice it up. And no matter what the top level will be crowded with top tiers. That's the reality of a fighter.

 

[HopeOfBlossom]

This game makes literally 0 sense.

A lot of player do not play with Lan adapter (it does help a lot)

You have to deal with FFA (when there is item, or even stage hazard I want to RQ)

But the worst **** ever. Is the f******* people setting rules like 3 stocks 3 minutes in order to abuse of the sudden death. This is the cheapest **** I have ever seen in an online game.

I'm aware that Sakurai doesn't want Smash to be a competitive game.

But I went from 200% of hype for this game to 200% of frustrations while playing online. I'm not asking for a competitive mode with ranking and stuff. I'm just asking for what we had in Smash 4. 4 Glory with preset rules that you cannot change. Because I'm gettign so sick of those stupid rules 3/4 of the people use in order to get easy GSP.

If you try to unlock Elite by doing stuff like this let me tell you you aren't even worth it getting it.

My rent is done. I needed to let that out because that got on my nerves.

 

[meleebrawler]

Bad MUs put you at a disadvantage. I want to rematch this person with someone that I feel will give me a better experience whilst facing them. Yes I could try again to improve the bad match-up, but I also would like to gauge my options.

Also what's wrong with that? If people want to use one character a lot but then switch they shouldn't be penalized with weaker opponents when they want to spice it up. And no matter what the top level will be crowded with top tiers. That's the reality of a fighter.

Well yes, of course there will be more top tiers in Elite on average. In fact looking at the average GSP of a given fighter worldwide can be a decent way of gauging their viability, or at least popularity.

But if everyone were to share a global GSP, the incentive to switch off your main(s) would be even lower, at least if you're afraid of it taking a hit for your experimentation. "But wait!", you might say, "we have unranked arenas that we can use to experiment with at no risk! Surely this per-character GSP system is unnecessary with this in mind!". Well, that's not what the devs are looking at for balance. There has always been a persistent problem in competitive gaming in that those who are inclined to win and be the best will gravitate to the best options, not willing to risk anything on lower-tier ones. This results in only big nerfs for the top tiers who get played a lot and have lots of data to go on, while conversely the bottom tiers seldom get any meaningful buffs due to the lack of high-level play to go on for them. With this system, low-tier characters have a better fighting chance to find people willing to push their limits and show what they can do or what needs improving, yet you still have the option to just use arenas if you don't want to commit to that grind and/or want immediate high-level players to train with.

About the rematching thing, let's see how some other fighting games handle them...

- Pokken Tournament: You can't rematch anyone in ranked, period. Only in unranked can you do that, with the option of changing characters too.
- ARMS: You can rematch and change loadouts with one person as many times as both players are willing in ranked. However, one must consider that the different characters and arms don't change playstyles nearly as much as in Smash, and is arguably built to foster a counterpick meta with all the customization afforded to the roster.
- Brawlhalla: Again, you can't immediately rematch the same opponent(s) in normal matchmaking.

All of these games use a unified rank for all characters the player uses, but these games also have far smaller or less distinct rosters than Ultimate's gargantuan 65+ unique characters.

 

[CadenLisa]

Lol holy sh*t what a long thread, Its to late for me to check, did 1.2.0 change the online at all?

 

[Pyr]

Lol holy sh*t what a long thread, Its to late for me to check, did 1.2.0 change the online at all?

It came out literally minutes ago.

https://smashboards.com/threads/v1-2-0-patch-notes.465465/

 

[Crazy Hand 2001]

Maybeall my "why are people paying for online" threads served a purpose.

I knew that Nintendo would somehow **** up the online because they knew you would pay for online no matter how bad it is.