How usable is Mario Maker 2 without Nintendo Switch online...

Bit defensive are we? Kill yourselves drones.

You're the one freaking out lmao

Because I'm disgusted at loathsome drones like guaranteeing that paid online will be a thing forever.

Thos sound like a joke, but the mario game online are SUPER fun.

Story Mode, not super long but still mostly quality levels.
And if you have a modded switch you can inject levels to your save. The only downside is limited selection and risk of small risk of corrupting your save file.

The game is basically nothing without online access
Do we need this asked five times a day

nobody cares, user. we've already been playing and enjoying the game without you. go do something else, you won't be missed

You a cheap motherfucker

Isn't it just the multiplayer that is blocked behind console subs? i play a shit ton of Little Big Planet 3 creations and never once was i subscribed to plus-

It's $20 for a year. I live off of unemployment insurance currently and even I can afford it. Get off your stupid moral high horse. That's the way things are these days, and you not buying it isn't going to change anything. Also there's the bundle that includes a subscription for literally $10. For a year. I'm about to go spend that on lunch that I'll eventually shit back out.

>we
Sorry, who are you speaking for?

Not OP but I'm interested also. Is there anything to this game offline like already made levels or is entirely multiplayer?

Had no one bought it, THERE WOULD BE NO ONLINE.

Why can't you understand this.

That become unplayable due to lag. Yea, so worth it.

I care because you are ruining video games.

People have been paying for online services since Xbox Live. Honestly I'm surprised Nintendo, given how they love to nickel and dime their customers, held out as long as they did. Of course if no one bought into this shit it wouldn't exist. But people did buy into it and they will keep buying into it, so now we're stuck with it. Might as well just suck it up, especially in this case the cost of entry is a paltry $10.

Then it'll be $25. Next gen it'll be $30. Eventually it'll be full price. Just don't buy it and it wouldn't happen.

Sell your switch. SELL YOUR FUCKING SWITCH RIGHT NOW. You don't deserve to play nintendo games

>don't give daddy nintendo money
>SELL YOUR SWITCH YOU HAVE NO RIGHT TO USE ONE IF YOU DON'T PAY THE NINTENDO TAX
how old are you ?

>it's another holier than thou user raging about the cheapest online in the industry even though he wants the content that's on it
yawn

Are you dumb? You aren't the only person on the planet. It's become a precedent and people are going to buy it. Even if you don't, others will. It's not going anywhere. Also online subscription prices for the big three have never increased, except Xbox might have gone from 50 to 60 at one point, but if so, it was early on.

>holier than thou
Is this actually how you see it? Do you think I won't pay for online because it makes me feel good to be locked out of games?

So this thread is a dud. Here's an easy level I've been working on.
CLK-XSR-RDG

nice fallacy. online is 5 dollars for a year with a full family plan. i dont approve of having to pay for this shit but 5 dollars is literally not worth pretending to get mad over. choose your battles better.

>The guys actually playing games and having fun
>Ruining games
ok kid

Attached: WVW69kPGZDUdceP6iy.jpg (320x240, 73K)

Not him but I think you won't pay because your stupid and get hung up on the principle of things, and in the end, the only thing you've accomplished is missing out on good games so you could have a couple extra bucks per year.

naw but you're looking down on other people for buying products and services they're interested in
>implying that the anons that rage about this kind of shit have enough friends to fill out a family plan

>your
Alright, I'm the stupid one.

Are you interested in paying for 30 year old games you can get free anywhere else? Or the undisputed worst online in the history of paid online?

Wait, you need to fucking buy the online shit just to download levels? I thought it was only for coop gameplay.

Jfc Nintendo

Why has nobody pissed their pants this hard about subbing to psn or xbl? It seems like Yea Forums just needs a new reason to cry about Nintendo until the next non-issue comes along.

I guess you can have fun with the story mode and still make levels and have your family and irl friends play them but you're still basically missing the main point of the game.

Attached: 1441750012535.jpg (328x353, 21K)

Uh oh, made a typo, everything I said is immediately invalid. Get the fuck out of here.

Attached: 1530522033834.png (500x517, 81K)

You may have a case of the stupid user, give the game a try. You may even have fun, I know that sounds crazy.

Disregarding OP's retardation, I really wonder why Nintendo keeps doing these huge deals for online. Like giving away an entire year for free with Twitch Prime or the big discounts from Mario Maker. Then you have stuff like the family plan where you can basically pay $5 for an entire year. It's not like their online service is impressive so I doubt it'll get anyone to come back and pay for more unless there's something they really want to play online.

everything you said was already invalid dumbass

Sonic is far superior to Mario in just about every way. Mario's gameplay puts me to sleep.

Your rebuttal is lacking.

What year are you living in

there are a lot of NES games I never got around to playing and being able to play them on a handheld is pretty nice

>sonic autist
That explains a lot of things

Comparatively the service Nintendo offers is much worse then the one provided by PSN or XBL. Paying for your own internet is still shit, but at least with those two the games you play on them actually have their own servers compared to Nintendo.

My rebuttal to what? I'm not

There are hundreds of handhelds you can play NES games on for free. Hell you can play them for free on SWITCH by hacking it.

Isn't it like $20 a year as opposed to at least $12 a month with the other two? I admit ninty's online services are shit but at least you're paying less if you're getting less.

>wow I have to pay an electric bill for a TV I already bought?
>wow I have to pay for water and detergent to clean clothes I already bought?
>wow I have to pay for gas for a car I already bought?

You still felt the need to judge my response by calling it invalid. That's a rebuttal.

and those extra handhelds aren't free, and I already own a switch so why buy a second piece of hardware when I can just do it for a dollar or so per month on the hardware I already have?
>paying extra for goods and services is wrong but hacking and stealing isn't
okay buddy

It is okay when nintendo does it

>tfw got the online because all I wanted was to play splatoon
I've put in about 200 hours since the paid online launched but I still resent that shit. Didn't improve the online at all, of any game, and just serves to gate players.

Attached: 1560232316540.png (416x492, 114K)

False equivalency
Paying for online isn't really like anything else we pay for, maybe costco and sams club memberships are the most similar.

On the one hand yeah, it sucks. On the other hand, $20 to play all the Mario levels you could ever fuckin want for a year, that value goes waaaaay beyond any other game I've played.

You're not paying to use your own internet, jesus. You're paying to use their (shitty) infrastructure. Nintendo discovered that supporting games that use online requires continuous money and support. That money has to come from somewhere, and pulling out of other areas of earnings is not ideal.

The other companies actually have servers to maintain, Nintendo doesn't. It is quite literally a Nintendo tax.

>wow I have to pay an electric bill for a TV I already bought?
Yes, you are paying for a service that you cannot reproduce at home. That is, unless you know how to build a nuclear reactor.

>wow I have to pay for water and detergent to clean clothes I already bought?
Yes, you are paying for a service that you cannot reproduce at home. That is, unless you have a water tower in your back yard.

>wow I have to pay for gas for a car I already bought?
Yes, you are paying for a commodity that you do not have access to in your home. That is, unless you live in the middle east and have a team full of petroleum miners handy.

Meanwhile with the internet, you ALREADY paid for it. Nintendo is providing you with absolutely nothing they didn't before minus their dumb NES games. In effect, they are locking you out of your own internet unless you paid for NES online regardless of your desire to use those games.

this is a case of it isn't okay when Nintendo does it

It's not okay when anyone does it, including Nintendo.

>The other companies actually have servers to maintain, Nintendo doesn't.
Wrong, didn't bother reading past that. Even peer to peer games need a backbone.

Attached: 1532443599334.gif (252x263, 2.99M)

so code your own multiplayer nes romhacks and build your own mario maker courses then, you have all the tools at your disposal and you won't have to pay Nintendo any money to do it
meanwhile, since I can't edit roms and I can't make as many mario courses as I want to play I'll pay for the service that does it for me

>Even peer to peer games need a backbone.
No they literally do not you tech illiterate retard.

OP is a fag but yeah nintendos online "service" is garbage, not even worth the reduced price of microsoft or sony's services. Still I'd pay for mario maker if I had a switch.

Its not JUST nintendo tax you moron. They are people who have to continually support their infrastructure. No matter how trash it is, there's still people working on it and therefore a cost.

bruh I have godawful midwest wifi and even I can run them no problem, how poor are you that your wif cant handle nes games?

P2P requires no - LITERALLY 0 infrastructure.

I wish I could be this confidently wrong.

>they are locking you out of your own internet

Lolno. The service is playing their games online. You can cry about it as much as you want but that isn't the same as "locking you out of your internet".

>The service is playing their games online.
However by the nature of P2P connections Nintendo provides no service towards that end, and I already paid $60 for the game. You argument is invalid.

Nope, lol literally giving you the ability to play online is the "service". Sorry it doesn't fit your personal definition but that's a fact.

xbl was p2p for 2 generations and people ate that shit up, it's only bad when Nintendo does it though

Wow. I love Yea Forums SO MUCH. At the bare minimum you need something to handle matchmaking. Then there's things like leaderboards, web presence, etc. Those things don't just run on magical hopes and fucking dreams.

Nintendo makes $100+ more per console than every other manufacturer. They can fucking aford it.

He probably can't go outside or else he'd somehow get a job and have money to buy the game and stop bitching. Getting the bundle with the 1yr online and not being a poorfag and having Amazon Prime/Twitch prime for another year of Switch online plus other offers for other games = 2 years of switch online for less than 40 dollars. It just seems so pathetic whining about such a small dollar amount.

It's more akin to cable, where there might be some channels you receive but cannot view until you pay for it. Then everyone switched to alternative methods of getting TV.

move those goalposts harder

That's irrelevant. There are still servers to maintain, which was the original point.

>There are still servers to maintain
No there aren't moron. It's the exact same as using a Sega Netlink to connect directly to someone else's Sega Saturn via a phone line, except wireless. There is no server involved.

Attached: 233px-Saturn_netlink.jpg (233x240, 7K)

Having a year of online access will encourage players to buy games to use that access, boosting software sales. And since they own the platform and their titles damn near never drop price, that's a solid strategy for cash flow.

Theoretically this can also be used to "handcuff" current Switch players to Nintendo's next console as well, much like PS+ and Gold subscriptions tend to keep CoD/Madden/GTA players buying the same company's next machine.

they did when the service was new. you just weren't there to see it. and they've sweetened the deal over time.

No it's not, you stupid bastard. The core gameplay may work that way but 9 times out of 10 in modern online games there are other elements that need to be handled on a central server/database. I've already given examples. Stop talking out of your ass. I'm a network engineer and an amateur indie dev working on a peer to peer game. Unless you're forcing players to manually enter an IP, you need a master server to, as I said, at the very least do matchmaking. That's for basic shit. When you get into AA and AAA games there's even more.

kill yourself nintenbro. imagine eating shit and liking it.

PS+ and Gold aren't required to play user created levels.

It wasn't the original argument the other two were making, but why would they need paid online for just that if they've done it for free since the Wii? Why would games on the PC not need paid online even though they might have even better online than Nintendo?

Attached: 1557468995290.png (800x800, 295K)

Great comeback. I'm not defending paid online, I wish it would go away. I'm simply saying that companies do have servers to maintain, even for peer to peer games.

There is a small story mode with around 100 levels, all made with the creator by Nintendo. They are intended to inspire you and show off mechanics you might have been aware of, so they feel different to a normal Mario game. You can make levels all you like offline, you just can't share them with other people or play theirs.

Are you new to life? Many online services cost money. You aren't paying to "use your own fucking internet" you retard. You're paying to use their servers.

>That's the way things are these days, and you not buying it isn't going to change anything

Glad we can confirm once and for all that "vote with your wallet" was always a meme and never a real solution.

I'm not saying they need to charge for it. I'm just correcting that one poster by saying that there are in fact servers to maintain. Just playing devil's advocate and correcting false information.

You've spent more effort whining in just this thread than I put in at work to make $20 in the first place lul

Imagine standing your ground after getting this blown the fuck out

You're literally not special for working. I work at Burger King and I can afford Nintendo Switch online for the rest of my life, doesn't mean I will :)

Fun fact: NSW Online uses the exact same protocols and servers as 3DS and Wii U for online multiplayer. You're paying for the exact same online service that used to be free.

It works, but not when it's a small minority of manchildren whining about kids toys.

i haven't bought a ps4 solely becuase of ps+.

Give user $20 then. Not to me but to any other user ITT. It's literally nothing right

yeah and you're not special for being contrarian on 4channel :)

MMO servers cost almost nothing to maintain compared to the money they make from it, and they cost significantly more than running a peer-to-peer service. It probably costs more to host Yea Forums than it does for Nintendo to host SMM2 levels

why should I? I'm enjoying the cope

One, that has nothing to do with my point, I'm not defending paid online, and two, everything uses standard open source protocols.

In other words it doesn't work.

But there are servers, right?

But you're agreeing there is a cost on Nintendo's side, and you are therefore paying for a service? Good. We agree

Do you guys have chicken fries?

Well no demand is half of economics. It's just the things that "gamers" sperg out over are inconsequential and often stupid.

Pay to play?
Nintendo wants you to buy and like their stuff. But you cant pander to everyone and still make money.

So they did what they think is best.
You dont like it? Tough shit. You can live without it.

Nintendo made a product/service and puts a price tag on it that they think it deserves. You are welcome to disagree. But im sure nintendo has more marketing and financial experts then you do, that says otherwise.

What protocols exactly?

it's also 1/4th the price you fucking mongoloid.

Yes but they're shit. Burger King is unsanitary and fucking GROSS man.

You can play the premade levels and create levels. It has more levels than NSMBU. The levels are good too, so it's worth it even without online. And if you ever decide to play online you will have tons of new levels to play. And probably 5% of those will be fun.

I was just thinking about this scene. What's the show called again?

One, that has everything to do with your point, since your entire argument is based on maintaing matchmaking/leaderboard/web servers, despite the fact that these same servers used to be free for end users. And you ARE defending paid online. Two, I am not talking about open source protocols, I am specifically talking about Nintendo's own protocols and system they used to connect and match players, which literally have not been updated since the 3DS and Wii U.

In the same way the Wii had servers, yes.
You are paying for a "service" with negligible costs and that is identical to the "service" that was offered for free on their prior platforms.

More people probably play switch online desu

so you're a bitter loser

But you're still paying for a service, right? Then we agree.

In other words "vote with your wallet" = "your view is inconsequential and stupid no criticism allowed, don't ask questions just consume product"

Is it boardwalk empire?

No that is not other words for what I said. It only works when a lot of people do it. Sadly, the "fat manchild who throws tantrums over games" demographic is small.

servers demand maintenance, and it costs money to hire people to maintain it.

A service which has no meaningful cost to operate and was offered for free.
If you want to reduce that to "you're still paying for a service" then you also agree that using adblock is a form of theft.

Yes it is. I remember Yea Forums posting that gif a lot back in the day

You fucking moron. The point was that that these services cost money. Just because nintendo offerred it for free does not mean it did not cost them money. Showing that something costs money to maintain is NOT the same as defending it. Are you actually this fucking retarded?

That's your argument? You're joking right?

Servers aren't cheap and way more people play switch online. Seems like all you have left is trying to put words in my mouth. How sad.

lan-play.com/

Reminder that piratebros can play online for free

That a lot more servers cost a lot more money? I'm afraid I don't see the joke.

itt: fanboys sucking nintendos cock

But there are servers, right? That's all I'm trying to say. This whole thing goes back to the user that said there are no servers for the company to maintain, which is completely untrue. I'm not making an argument on whether or not we should have to pay for the maintenance, I'm making an argument that they exist. Nothing more.

You have no fucking clue if the cost is negligable. You arent a manager at nintendo. For all you know they eventually realized that their free policy was hurting them more than it benefitted them.

In other words it doesn't work.

Protip: When your defense against criticism relies on weak ad hominems and discrediting critics by calling them "fat manchild who throws tantrum over games" you are conceding you don't actually have an argument.

>nobody complained about the 360 and PS4 charging for online

Attached: 1525618214591.png (645x729, 59K)

>Nintendo's own protocols and system they used to connect and match players, which literally have not been updated since the 3DS and Wii U.
Unless you're a backend network engineer at Nintendo, you have absolutely no way of knowing that. Zero.

>kill yourself nintendbro. Imagine eating shit and liking it.

>everyone gives in when Sony and Microsoft implement paid online. Now suddenly everyone has principles
It's a little late to be taking a stand guys.

Well no, you don't need to look much further than outrage culture to see voting with your wallet does work. It's just that "mad gamers" aren't a relevant group. think you're being purposeful difficult.

Also ad hominem doesn't mean "he made fun of me".

He wanted to sound smart enough to not be called on it.

4channel pass should be mandatory to post here, servers are expensive goy

>everyone who disagrees with me is the same person

>nintendofags have the cheapest online service
>they're also the only ones apart from PCbros that cry about paid online bullshit

Why are xbots and sonyfags so fucking cancerous? Specially PS4fags, the entire board went HURR IT'S ONLY $5 A MONTH WHAT ARE YOU POOR when the paid PSN service got announced

>jews are out to get me
Shouldn't you be on your mentally ill containment board, /pol/?

snoyfags got frog boiled with actual good games on early ps plus. Nintendo will also increase the price to match sony and microsoft by next generation

>everyone owes me everything for free

Fucking millennials

Not him but they're all based on one protocol, NEX (using PRUDP), between the user and the server for matchmaking, ranking and other stuff. Every single in-game communication between users in multiplayer is peer-to-peer. Literally the only way you would have a better experience playing Switch titles is either you improved your connection and/or Nintendo improved their game's netcode itself. This is publicly available information.

I already paid for their shitty console + game. Why do I also have to fucking pay TWICE for my internet connection?

Im not a /pol/ack but nice try shill

Companies have to hire like 2 indians to maintain the servers. Do you want them to go bankrupt you fucking communist?

Developers aren't locked into a single protocol. Yeah, Nintendo tends to use proprietary things, but there's nothing stopping a developer for using a more open source solution. TCP/IP and UDP are still the groundwork. Anything above that is optional.

>he doesn't pay for 4channel
>he doesn't pay for his internet browser
fucking entitled millenial

heh... gotta go fast, huh? heh...

The Sonic series as a whole is so atrocious I don't even understand how it still gets games and even a movie.

You mean the same "outrage culture" perpetuated by a (wo)manchildren minority who maintain relevancy by sperging over inconsequential and often stupid things online and creating bad PR for companies despite being a tiny minority in the actual market. That's the exact opposite of voting with your wallet, which simply involves choosing whether to buy or not buy something based on whether you want to support those businesses. As for being "purposeful difficult" I'm not the one who said you not buying it isn't going to change anything and then quickly backpedaled to try and justify voting with your wallet.

Also trying to discredit an argument by accusing them of being an irrelevant manchild is textbook ad hominem.

You're talking about game-specific netcode, the devs have control over that but it's irrelevant when you can't play retail games with online multiplayer on the switch without paying a subscription fee regardless of who the developer is.

If you genuinely believe that the cost of running matchmaking servers for p2p play and hosting leaderboards and smm2 levels is anywhere near as high as the cost of running an MMO service with dedicated servers, which has been demonstrably proven to be negligible then you don't have a fucking clue what you're talking about. You don't have to be a manager at Nintendo to realize that console companies make the majority of profit (not revenue, but pure profit) from paid online services like Xbox live and PS+

Why did you quote me in that? Your outburst as absolutely nothing to do with what I said.

Goalposts and irrelevancy. The poster I was replying to said that Nintendo had been using the same protocols since the Wii or 3DS or whatever. I was merely stating it was irrelevant since there isn't some mandate on what protocols that can be used. The only place that would apply is using Nintendo's account services, which is equivalent to any other account-based online service.

They exist in the same way servers for websites exists and you are committing theft by using adblock and archiving their articles.

kys then have sex

Okay. Literally has nothing to do with what I posted.

Are you fucking retarded? Saying servers costs money to maintain in an argument whether they should charge a subscription fee to play peer to peer multiplayer and download KBs worth of custom mario levels is defending it by using the cost to justify the subfee.

You know what else costs money? Developing and updating the web browser you're using. That's not the same as saying it you should pay money to use your web browser but it does cost money to maintain so maybe people should pay for the privilege. I'm not saying they should though, you fucking moron.

>demonstratably proven
Source?

Nintendo's service does not cover JUST p2p games. Its not much, its shit, but there are other services it provides. Even if the cost of a single p2p game is minimal, it still falls under "cost that can be covered by a dirt cheap service"

>Servers aren't cheap
Yes they are, retard.

>way more people play switch online
[citation needed]
3DS sold more than the switch and had more online games, combined with the Wii U you'd have to be retarded to claim they needed to charge for online because more people play when the most popular PC games don't have subscription fees.

By that logic more people are playing FFXIV and needs more servers then every free multiplayer PC game combined.

Just because something CAN be used an arguement for something, that DOES NOT mean that making the arguement IS arguing for said thing. This is the stupidest fucking logic I have ever heard.

You're not using your internet you're accessing their content.

you're not quite wrong though...
>Had to add in a ton of new servers recent;y
>Still can't handle the flood of players and are talking about yet more in the next few months

>can afford a $300 console and a $60 game
>can't spare 20bux

Sorry I can't pull up decade old financial reports from MMO companies back when subfees for MMOs were the norm. You'll just have to take my word for it or keep believing the cost of MMO servers warrant monthly subs despite the fact that most MMOs have abandoned the sub model.

>Nintendo's service does not cover JUST p2p games
Then they could just offer the service without locking p2p multiplayer behind it, just like PS+ on the PS3. Of course they won't do that because charging subscription fees for P2P multiplayer is basically free money for console companies since the cost of maintaining them is practically non-existent

Where's your Yea Forums pass? You are accessing 4channel's content, not the content of other anons.

Sure, they could, but thats generally not how companies like to operate. If there is a cost, no matter how minimal, there has to be a justification for that cost. While I would prefer it to be free, it seems completely justifiable to throw it under a dirt cheap package that is intended to cover online costs anyway.

A MMO getting a surge of popularity at the release of a new expansion means there are more people playing it than every other multiplayer game without a paid subscription. Makes sense.

You can play the "story mode"---which is a sixty stage tutorial on all the neat interactions you can make in the stage editor. Without online, you would only be able to play your local levels.

Best bet would be wait for a used copy and pick up a year subscription card to Switch online for a total of sixty bucks.

Okay. Literally has nothing to do with what I posted.

>lan-play.com/
Oh boy, sixteen people in France playing hacked Switch games together. Pass.

There is a mandate on what online multiplayer games require a paid subscription to Switch online, it's irrelevant on who developer of the game.

You were the one who moved the goalposts, the paid subscription is for Nintendo's online service, you're not paying based on how game developer's netcode. If developers were allowed to opt out of Switch's paid online with their own matchmaking and servers without making their multiplayer game free to play then you might have had a point.

Or just buy the bundle for $70 and play it today. $10 for a year of online access is a really reasonable deal. We can argue all day about whether we should have to pay for it, but the fact is that we do and that isn't going to change anytime soon, so might as well make the most of it.

>saying servers cost money is arguement for saying whether they should charge money

There it is you fucking numbskull. Want me to spell it out for you? I AM NOT saying nintendo should charge for the service, but I AM saying the service costs money to maintain. I ignored the rest of your post because it assumed I was arguing in support for nintendo charging money for the service.

I gave up on consoles entirely because paid online as it's handled right now will never be worth any amount and I don't buy many single-player games.

Attached: 1556985649561.png (300x300, 42K)

Why did you quote me in that? Your outburst as absolutely nothing to do with what I said.

The poster I originally was replying to implied that the specific protocols used were the same ones used in the Wii and 3DS eras, but weren't charged for. I was merely stating that the protocols themselves were irrelevant because they weren't mandatory and like you said, regardless of the protocol used, you're still paying for it via the subscription. Again, I'm not defending paid online. I'm just stating facts. There was no need to bring up underlying tech in the first place, especially when it was pretty clear the person that first did it had no idea what they were talking about.

What does discussing protocols have to do with outrage culture? Fucking dumbass.

Tell that to Valve and every other publisher and dev that manages to release multiplayer games on PC without charging an extra fee for the privileged. On last gen consoles the justification for the laughable "cost" of p2p multiplayer was the purchase of games themselves. Of course companies like to operate with insane profit margins and realized they could dupe console players into paying a subscription fee for online multiplayer, so now we have a gaggle of retards defending it on the pretense of matchmaking and leaderboard server "costs" and nobody is allowed to question it unless they work for Nintendo

The homebrew scene has a up/downloader of their own. You will have to get your stuff from the pirate community, but you will have some of it.

Okay. Literally has nothing to do with what I posted.

Not saying it wouldnt be better free, just saying that I get it. Since when was understanding being a diehard supporter?

I'm not the one who brought up outrage culture. Fucking retard.

are you in america? i can still fit 5 more accounts on my family plan

What the fuck? I literally quoted you and directly responded to it. Absolute retardation are trolling only the only explanations for you at this point.

What the fuck? I literally quoted you and directly responded to it. Absolute retardation or trolling is the only explanation for you at this point.

... are you completely stupid? Go read the reply chain, idiot.

Eh? Thanks Yea Forums. You said i cancelled that one.

You literally - LITERALLY don't have a choice if you want to play nintendo games online.
It sucks but there are no alternatives. It isn't like normal products where if one watch maker starts doing something stupid you can buy a different watch from another watch maker since they do the same function. With stuff like games Nintendo have a monopoly since there isn't an alternative for nintendo games.

Not at all, and I don't agree with it either. I'm trading in all my Switch games to get it, and after the $10 year is up I'm selling it and hacking my Switch. I know I'll be bored of it by then just like the first game.

There's definitely a moron or troll in this thread. My guess is some teenager that thinks they know how to debate but of course doesn't know how and won't concede.

And I understand why companies wanted to implement lootboxes in every game. I'm not a diehard supporter of it but I get it and it should be allowed.

But they are mandatory. As a developer of an online multiplayer game on the Swtich you literally cannot opt out of Switch online unless your game is free to play. The developer's own game-specific netcode is completely irrelevant, it doesn't matter if they bring their own servers and matchmaking. The fact of the matter is that, as far as online multiplayer and communication, Switch online subscribers are paying for the same service with the same underlying tech that was free in the first place. If anyone has no idea what they are talking about here it's you.

Okay. Literally has nothing to do with what I posted.

Thanks for restating exactly what I said in the post you replied to.

Misquote, Meant for

I said nothing about what should and should not be a allowed, and there other things that must be considered when discussing legal issues.

Lootboxes potentially prey on gambling addiction with children. I do not see nearly as strong of a moral arguement against nintendo charging for online.

> i was exposed as an idort so i will counter with le epic troll

kys

You stated that the same protocols used for Switch online as the Wii U and 3DS online is irrelevant in an argument over Switch online being paid, because game developers could use their own, despite the fact the sub pays for the former and not the latter.

I'm sorry you feel that way.

I said nothing about lootboxes being good for children, and there *are other things that must be considered when discussing moral issues.

Not saying it wouldn't be better if lootboxes didn't prey on children, but I get it. I do not see nearly as strong of a legal argument against EA charging for surprise mechanics.

Are you saying that you are serious by responding with the same retarded post? Actually, dont kill youself. Live your life as a retarded faggot and see where that gets you.

Wait, you actually have to pay money to play online on the switch?

Is this real?

I don't know about you, but $10 for a year's worth of NSO is not a bad deal at all.

>I was merely stating that the protocols themselves were irrelevant because they weren't mandatory and like you said, regardless of the protocol used, you're still paying for it via the subscription.
Basic reading skills required.

Nigga what the fuck. Your just replacing and mixing words now, and I have no idea what you are trying to say. Woopdeedoo you can replace words in an arguement and make it sound worse in vaguely related contexts

The protocols used for Nintendo's service are relevant because the cost of running the service was used to justify charging people for it. The fact that they haven't updated it since the service was free is evidence that it doesn't warrant being behind a paywall.

Those aren't the words I used at all, your outburst has nothing to do with what I said.

Where did I say otherwise?

I cant wait for every multiplayer Nintendo game to be permanently shut down once Nintendo Online gets replaced with something else. This is the future you choose.

I got the game with the ten dollaridoos for a year online.
Don't get me wrong, i still think paying for online is stupid but missing on good game content because of ten bucks was too much of a scrooge move even for me.
i'll see if it's worth of my money during the year but if they increase the sub or if i don't get enough fun from it, there will be no renewal.

I have no idea if you are OP or not, but you've clearly just resorted to trolling now you autistic motherfucker. Both of the dicussions I was having ended up here.

Good thing for Nintendo the world is full of sheeple like you.

Oh fuck off you pretentious poor nerd cunt.

AHAHAHAHAHA

>all these Nintenshills defending paid online
I piss on you

That's also true for the online they didn't charge for. Nintendo still needs to be pinged for online even if it is P2P so when the Wii U and 3DS service is cut so will their games
I would think the best option is that they stop charging for online when they stop developing games for the switch since it's really a payment stream for update development and wouldn't need to exist when games aren't supported
I don't trust them to do that, but I still hope it happens

Have sex before you shoot up a school playground.

why would people being too poor to afford $20/year cause him to get angry?

The 8GB Vita memory cards are only $20. Why didn't you buy one??? What are you, poor?

lol Vita means life :)

"only" $20 for 8GB? What a steal!!!

>him
seriously, have sex

bro there are no women on the internet

Where do you think the levels are stored, dumbass?

Because those are old news and people did piss their pants over Playstation going P2P and eventually Nintendo. It's a shame you are so complacent about it and eager to buy it instead of actually fighting to keep the one based thing about Nintendo consoles.