Nintendo has delayed their online subscription, that was set to launch in Autumn 2017, to launch sometime in 2018, meaning users will get some more time experiencing online on the Switch for free! They also revealed the prices and the fact that people with a paid subscription will get access to older games with new online play support. The full details and prices can be seen below.

Online lobby and voice chat
Our new dedicated smart device app will connect to Nintendo Switch and let you invite friends to play online, set play appointments, and chat with friends during online matches in compatible games─all from your smart device.

A free, limited version of this app will be available for download in summer 2017.

Classic Game Selection*
Subscribers will get to download a compilation of classic titles with added online play, such as Super Mario Bros. 3, Balloon Fight and Dr. Mario.

Subscription prices:

1-Month Membership
$3.99 (USD)

3-Month Membership
$7.99 (USD)

12-Month Membership
$19.99 (USD)

Source

More information regarding the classic games collection:

Nintendo confirmed that this monthly plan has indeed changed, telling Kotaku: “Nintendo Switch Online subscribers will have ongoing access to a library of classic games with added online play. Users can play as many of the games as they want, as often as they like, as long as they have an active subscription.”

Source

 

[Steena]

That's the thing though, the games you'v mentioned are hardly demanding when it comes to online, if it can run something like the battlefield games, then you have a point. Otherwise, dedicated servers are always better than p2p.

No online nintendo game is demanding when it comes to physics. The most taxing example has to be Melee (which does not have legitimate online), then MK8 but the way the game works you have plenty of time to calculate trajectories beforehand and rollback, you always have plenty of time before you get hit by physics-related stuff. It's at least much slower than bullets' physics and there are not 64 players in one race either. But when even the pokemon online experience is comparatively worse and clunkier than battlefield online, in which individual bullets are affected by gravity and there are destructible planes flying around, it probably has to do with incompetence.

But no, for a fighting game dedicated servers are an inferior choice. In most other genres when there are more than 2 people they are better, the more people you have the less chaotic elements you want and consistency for everyone becomes more important than frame-perfect sync. Also most games are slow enough that frame perfection doesn't get noticed more than once every thousands of instances. Dedicated servers need to wait for an additional round of having all the data travel to the server for verification, synch everything in the same timeline, then traveling to the other player, and fighting games' pace is already too fast to afford that additional loop, since they generally function on 2-3 frame chunks that can be felt by the player at all times (the length of time it takes for a fast poke to come out). In that case speed is more important than not wanting to risk a bad host, because a dedicated server will degrade EVERY low ping match unless the next smash's gameplay gets even slower than 4. So while that would eliminate really terrible matches, it'd also eliminate potential flawless matches. Perhaps they could switch dynamically so that when any calculated ping goes over 100, the fight will happen in a dedicated server, so you'd get the best possible experience. But that sort of mentality is way beyond what Nintendo knows or probably even cares about.

 

[HaloEliteLegend]

LOL Nintendo is charging for their online as well?? Not a chance. They ain't seeing a penny from me ever. I don't own a switch yet and may never own one with this news. Sony, Microsoft and now Nintendo, im disgusted with how things are going. Online is Free and just prt of the game, online play shouldn't cost separately. Nintendo sold out and it may not even pay off yet. Nintendos online is free forever, they have not the right to charge to use their smaller scale service

I can't believe there are people out there defending these practices, too. They point to things like free games or online deals, but really when you boil it down, it's just a money-making scheme to extort your money. I point to the PC. Steam has amazing deals for everyone, and so does other sites like G2A and IndieGala, and you have free, often better online services, too. It's absurd that they charge for inferior services what on PC is free and better.

 

[Saiyan Lusitano]

I can't believe there are people out there defending these practices, too. They point to things like free games or online deals, but really when you boil it down, it's just a money-making scheme to extort your money. I point to the PC. Steam has amazing deals for everyone, and so does other sites like G2A and IndieGala, and you have free, often better online services, too. It's absurd that they charge for inferior services what on PC is free and better.

Nintendo is copying what XBL and PSN have been doing it for years. It has become normalised so most people have just gotten used to it.

P.S. What I can't believe is that you actually mentioned that con of G2A.

 

[|<roni&g]

Yes idiots are always going to defend nintendo or their favourite company, but the fact is to warrant a Payment to access their online services they would need an equal or bigger online library than the other consoles, which likely won't happen. There aren't enough games nintendo could give away for free to justify it

Nintendos online is free and needs to stay that way, a petition should be started.
Not a person out there that can justify a annual payment to Nintendo just for their online, that's not how it works.

I wish I could afford a powerhouse pc but they're well out of my price range and it's like a maze when you start looking into buying a decent one

 

[Saiyan Lusitano]

Nintendos online is free and needs to stay that way, a petition should be started.

Petitions rarely ever work, especially with this matter.

Not a person out there that can justify a annual payment to Nintendo just for their online, that's not how it works.

Arguments:

"It's cheaper than PSN/XBL."
"We get free monthly games."
"It's Nintendo."

The Nintendo loyalists won't mind to pay (or even pre-order the service if it was possible) but really, Nintendo has a fucking arse online service and they have had YEARS to improve it. I don't really expect it to improve much by then. Meh.

I've stopped playing Mario Kart 8 Deluxe online (still pick up to play 200cc offline cups) so it's looking unlikely I'll go along with it, not to mention it's only in 2018 so by that time I might lose my interest for the Switch completely (barely any games on it).

 

[Jonna]

I wonder, has any one actually asked Nintendo why they decided to charge for it? Did Nintendo release a statement as to why they decided to do it?

 

[Saiyan Lusitano]

I wonder, has any one actually asked Nintendo why they decided to charge for it? Did Nintendo release a statement as to why they decided to do it?

Yeah, who knows. It has nothing to do with XBL and PSN charging for their online services.

 

[TheDarkGreninja]

No online nintendo game is demanding when it comes to physics. The most taxing example has to be Melee (which does not have legitimate online), then MK8 but the way the game works you have plenty of time to calculate trajectories beforehand and rollback, you always have plenty of time before you get hit by physics-related stuff. It's at least much slower than bullets' physics and there are not 64 players in one race either. But when even the pokemon online experience is comparatively worse and clunkier than battlefield online, in which individual bullets are affected by gravity and there are destructible planes flying around, it probably has to do with incompetence.

But no, for a fighting game dedicated servers are an inferior choice. In most other genres when there are more than 2 people they are better, the more people you have the less chaotic elements you want and consistency for everyone becomes more important than frame-perfect sync. Also most games are slow enough that frame perfection doesn't get noticed more than once every thousands of instances. Dedicated servers need to wait for an additional round of having all the data travel to the server for verification, synch everything in the same timeline, then traveling to the other player, and fighting games' pace is already too fast to afford that additional loop, since they generally function on 2-3 frame chunks that can be felt by the player at all times (the length of time it takes for a fast poke to come out). In that case speed is more important than not wanting to risk a bad host, because a dedicated server will degrade EVERY low ping match unless the next smash's gameplay gets even slower than 4. So while that would eliminate really terrible matches, it'd also eliminate potential flawless matches. Perhaps they could switch dynamically so that when any calculated ping goes over 100, the fight will happen in a dedicated server, so you'd get the best possible experience. But that sort of mentality is way beyond what Nintendo knows or probably even cares about.

Let's break down that argument, shall we?

"No online nintendo game is demanding when it comes to physics."

While it does seem like it, the Nintendo Switch isnt just exclusive to Nintendo games and Nintendo needs to future-proof for possible third party titles that may require it.

"But when even the pokemon online experience is comparatively worse and clunkier than battlefield online"

Yeah, thats because Pokemon's online is p2p.

"for a fighting game dedicated servers are an inferior choice."

But are we JUST discussing fighting games? No. Nintendo needs to make their servers good for all types of games.

The Nintendo loyalists

Lol. That's what you call someone who disagrees with you, after all, they have to have some bias right?

 

[Saiyan Lusitano]

Lol. That's what you call someone who disagrees with you, after all, they have to have some bias right?

Nope. It's just those who're willing to pay for an overpriced version just because it's on Nintendo or something along the lines.

Heck, you're even fine with the clunky voice-chat accessory that's a damn mess.

 

[TheDarkGreninja]

Nope. It's just those who're willing to pay for an overpriced version just because it's on Nintendo or something along the lines.

Heck, you're even fine with the clunky voice-chat accessory that's a damn mess.

You might've wanted to research that further.
I'm not "fine" with it, I'm tolerating it. I also dont want to criticise something until I've properly used it.

 

[Saiyan Lusitano]

You might've wanted to research that further.
I'm not "fine" with it, I'm tolerating it. I also dont want to criticise something until I've properly used it.

To carry on that conversation of the voice-chat, you then went on to damage control. The simple words "Nintendo loyalist" annoyed you to actually make a reply to it.

It wasn't directed at you, but you made it about you, regardless.

 

[TheDarkGreninja]

To carry on that conversation of the voice-chat, you then went on to damage control. The simple words "Nintendo loyalist" annoyed you to actually make a reply to it.

It wasn't directed at you, but you made it about you, regardless.

The hell are you talking about?

 

[TehCupcakes]

Don't know if I'm just late to the party, but for me the big news here is the price. $20 for a year is actually a fantastic price. I initially was very opposed to the idea of Nintendo having paid-online because I was expecting it to be like Xbox Live and PS+ prices. For $20, that is very affordable and much more reasonable, in my opinion.

 

[Spider_Man]

its very questionable to why something that has been the norm, takes nintendo till 2018 to get into place.

again one step behind.

i also question how it will cope running demanding games having it being wifi only (thats if its to ever get anything demanding)

 

[Dr.Hacknik]

Still seems like I will be paying for a Shitty online experience. Why can't we just have Nintendo Network; which is decent, and free. Of course, Xbox Live and PSN exist, but are shitty in the first place. Mostly because of the users; hopefully this won't be too bad, but doesn't impress me by an margin.

 

[steveroo]

Would be cool if live voice chat was available in all online games for anyone playing and not just people who have friend codes. Old retro games with co op online would be interesting with voice chat.

 

[DeletedMember411838]

No online nintendo game is demanding when it comes to physics. The most taxing example has to be Melee (which does not have legitimate online), then MK8 but the way the game works you have plenty of time to calculate trajectories beforehand and rollback, you always have plenty of time before you get hit by physics-related stuff. It's at least much slower than bullets' physics and there are not 64 players in one race either. But when even the pokemon online experience is comparatively worse and clunkier than battlefield online, in which individual bullets are affected by gravity and there are destructible planes flying around, it probably has to do with incompetence.

But no, for a fighting game dedicated servers are an inferior choice. In most other genres when there are more than 2 people they are better, the more people you have the less chaotic elements you want and consistency for everyone becomes more important than frame-perfect sync. Also most games are slow enough that frame perfection doesn't get noticed more than once every thousands of instances. Dedicated servers need to wait for an additional round of having all the data travel to the server for verification, synch everything in the same timeline, then traveling to the other player, and fighting games' pace is already too fast to afford that additional loop, since they generally function on 2-3 frame chunks that can be felt by the player at all times (the length of time it takes for a fast poke to come out). In that case speed is more important than not wanting to risk a bad host, because a dedicated server will degrade EVERY low ping match unless the next smash's gameplay gets even slower than 4. So while that would eliminate really terrible matches, it'd also eliminate potential flawless matches. Perhaps they could switch dynamically so that when any calculated ping goes over 100, the fight will happen in a dedicated server, so you'd get the best possible experience. But that sort of mentality is way beyond what Nintendo knows or probably even cares about.

Umm, Splatoon is Extremely demanding on Physics, all that ink is Physics, that is why the only local multiplayer is with 2 switches, the switch can't handle 2 players on 1 device.

It can barely handle 1.

 

[the_randomizer]

Man, I'm glad I won't be wasting money on this.

 

[Pluupy]

This coming so soon after the recent ban wave and Supreme Court ruling. Any more news?

Banwave? Two people get banned and that gets called a ban wave now?

 

[DeletedMember411838]

Banwave? Two people get banned and that gets called a ban wave now?

3 people got banned from the CDN stuff, however

A ton of people just got banned from Octling hacks on Splatoon, keep up . (not sure which one he is talking about though, but there is a banwave going on right now in Splatoon)