Recently we have seen various Switches belonging to hackers, a device without many well developed public hacks at time of writing, be banned from Nintendo's online offerings. Such a thing then became the subject of much discussion, not only because all of Nintendo's previous efforts in the last decade or so have had next to no proper security and at the same time were often barely functional.
One thing that came up more than once was the notion that a banned Switch is if not worthless then worth a whole lot less. It is not a new concept as games go; see also the xbox 360 and its various banwaves last generation wherein banned ones could be seen at points to go for sometimes less than half that of a new charting game, at the same time equivalent setups that were unbanned would still go for more than a charting game and maybe even two.

Related to this is the notion some developers and publishers have that single player only games are at least untenable from a financial perspective. Such a thing has seen many a game have a multiplayer mode tacked on, almost invariably at a cost of development focus or budget for the single player.

For myself then local multiplayer and co-op were much enjoyed staples of my pre online days, single player was almost always where it was at though. Then they started wanting me to pay for online, something I have never done unless you count dial up costs on my dreamcast. I never once had an online 360 of my own or one readily accessible and would maintain it was probably one of the best periods of gaming ever for me. The idea that a banned device is worthless is then very odd, though I am of course more than happy to pay the pittance some consider them worth to get such a banned device if it still allows single player.

This is part of a series on GBAtemp where we consider game design, aspects of play and game industry concepts. Previously we discussed emulation vs hardware.

Spoiler: earlier editions

a favoured game style that might have become less common in recent times, skills one might have learned or honed because of a game, games on the PS4 and Xbone that will stand the test of time, games that got better after launch, cancelled games and shuttered devs, and story canon in games.

To that end you are invited once more to talk about the ideas raised in the text above and anything related to it you feel warrants mention.

 

[wicksand420]

Online play has no appeal to me, so a online service you have to pay for is dumb in my opinion. But that doesn't mean I want to be banned, how else could I buy games from nintendo.

 

[Hozu]

I figure it depends on what you get in exchange for a banned console. IMO emulators aren't enough because you can emulate on another device and retain online access. Piracy? Maybe if you don't ever want to play any of those games with other people. Really, the biggest factor is the other homebrew.

 

[ItsKipz]

I might be entirely avoiding homebrew just to keep online play. Especially if i'm paying 20$ a year for it - i wanna play my splatoon 2.

 

[Delerious]

I'll take CFW over Online play almost anytime. Sick of hearing how some twelvie has fucked my mom for the millionth time, I mostly play local/lan multiplayer.

If I get banned, I get banned, but that'll just instigate me to start pirating, since being banned puts EShop on lockdown. So IMO it's not really the user who needs to consider where the balance lies, but Nintendo/whatever company, as locking me out of purchases gives no choice BUT to pirate.

It's subjective - If you are still able to get hard copies of games, then that still gives you the choice of buying it, so long as you have a compatible firmware version. Otherwise, for digital only, yeah, kinda up against a wall there unless you choose to buy a second system, which isn't always practical.

It depends on the system. On a Nintendo system, near worthless. All of my friends bought a Wii U and are extremely hesitant about getting a Switch. I basically have nobody to play with anyway. Even if they did have Switches, there's not much to do online with a Nintendo Switch. None of us liked Splatoon and you can only play Mario Kart so much.

On a PS4, equally as valuable as single player. Playing with friends online is really fun. Of course, local might be even better, but everybody has limited time so online is a very reasonable compromise.

Honestly, I'm pretty much in agreement to this, at least the way things are now. I'm more a PC gamer than anything, so all my multiplayer is on PC. The Switch, for me, is basically my entertainment when I feel like sitting back on a couch, whether it be on a TV or in handheld mode. Even then, I'm not really using my Switch for much, other than Stardew Valley and BOTW until other titles come to the platform, and Atmosphere so I can comfortably do homebrew/emulation.

 

[PvD79]

Dont like online much. I get tired of stupid kiddie comments and I grew up on NES only having single player or someone physically with you to play. I see articles about single player dying and if it does that, Ill probably be done. That being said, seems most of the comments on here prefer single player, but this a forum for people who hack and have a preference to CFWs.

 

[nero99]

All we need is a way to spoof our CID and user ID and our systems won’t get banned

 

[HaloEliteLegend]

Playing online is important to me. When my friends and I can't get together in real life, we'll boot up some game and play that together. My best friend was moving to another country for a few years, and I wouldn't get to see him for a long time. So before he moved, we decided on a few MMOs and online games to buy so that we could continue being together even while he was halfway around on the world. Online games are the reason our friendship is still as strong as ever after he returned. To be unable to play online on any one of my gaming systems would be unthinkable.

 

[DS1]

So while I am a big fighting game fan, unfortunately Sony requires PSN for all online play (~$5 a month). On top of the fact that most of the games I play have awful netcode, online is never worth it to me.

There are some gimmicky online elements to other games i have (Nioh specifically), but I could do without them all the same.

 

[dAVID_]

I think this is mainly a problem for games that can only be played online or be enjoyed online. For example, TF2. You can sure play against bots in any a few maps, but once you master the game, bots won't suffice to your level of skill, and you'll need online play to keep enjoying the game.

 

[kassemmel]

99% of the time I am playing offline. Paying an online service for those 1% FOR EACH console I own is ridiculous so I much rather not pay. I would very much prefer it like steam is doing and the only online games I play are usually PC games

 

[dude1]

To me multiplayer will always play 2nd fiddle to single player I play for fun & experiences
And rarely does that include playing with random a$$#0£€$
I don't have a consistent friend base big enough playing what I want when I want and haven't since school days

I love FPS games but don't have the time to divote to them the same way
I still play online ever few days but I'm probably 10% online the rest offline & if I could make a deal with the devil for double the AC's, GTAs red deads & fire watches of the world at the expense of multiplayer I would in a heartbeat

Honestly I'm wanting AI & machine learning to make gaming solo better and better even faking online so it can remove a lot of the downsides that multiplayer has

 

[Chary]

I absolutely love playing online with friends. There's so many amazing online multiplayer games, and so long as you don't really play with randoms, it's always a fun time.

 

[Trylk248]

While most of onlines games promises you good experience... You need to be thrown in 2 months of gameplay with REAL players and see how they interact with you. My experience : overall BAD but RARELY GOOD

So, I do NOT mind about online game. Impose me an ONLINE-ONLY game and I can tell you : Why ? What's the whole point?

I can play Minecraft for the Switch with my game card and be fine OFFLINE. At least, nobody who screams, etc. You're doing your own things at your pace.

 

[slaphappygamer]

Glitchers, cheaters, and damn people with nothing better to do than to spend hella money and 50 hours a week on a game just to kill you quicker than you can show up or cheat you out of that awesome race time kill The Whole Online Play for me. Online play is forever ruined for me. Tried it with cod ww4. There is always a cheater looking to upset your good time. At least, this is my experience. Your online experience may be different.

 

[tbb043]

Online means nothing to me. Last game (only game) I took online was a session of Tetris DS, and it did nothing for me. I'll take a jtag'd 360 or a cfw'd PS3 over being able to go online any day (and twice on sunday)!

 

[Obveron]

I mostly prefer multi-player games. In my world, Local mp>online mp>single player.

 

[Steena]

Back in ps1 times fps games were bad because no consideration was done for console controls at all. For a long time now games are made to be used with a controller so it is no longer a problem. These days fps games have way more buttons than a typical wasd + mouse configuration so i would probably prefer to play with a controller on the pc as well.

That's still irrelevant and factually wrong, recent crossplay tests for shooters are still being discarded because keyboard shows consistent advantages over controllers, and some companies are even banning you online if they detect you use a keyboard with an adapter to win competitive ladders and people actually complain very hard about this (for good reason, but also, you should probably play on PC if you decide to play competitive shooters)

no analog console pad will ever beat the mouse as a pointer for the shooting mechanic in translating accuracy with your physical movement - you are literally losing a ton of input ranges whichever way you calibrate the sensitivity so you'll always end up handicapped, it will always feel worse; even if games are designed to be slower/clunkier to mask the analog limit, that's merely applied on top of it, it doesn't perfectly align and fill the holes in the control rage.
just because shooters sell on consoles and they are made with a controller in mind it doesn't automatically mean controller is the best method there can be. that's some sort of hardware egalitarian fantasy. The reality is, most people aren't very competitive and they can still get through a game with inferior controls and that's good enough. The exact same applies to racing games and keyboards, and to a smaller extent, racing games and controllers. A wheel is insanely better, it's just that most people don't care enough to spend more for the improvement it gives, even when the accessory exists and is legal/compatible to use.

 

[Rudy69]

Personally I don't play any online games. I played some Mario Kart on Wii U online but i find it gets old fast. I like playing with the other players beside me

 

[ov3rkill]

I'd take single player story/campaign any time of the day than a multiplayer online one. I guess online multiplayer's advantage is the replayability and competitive aspect of it. I would dread the day when an online-only single player game like Diablo 3 would come to the Switch. I'm just glad they offered offline for the consoles. Having an option would be nice. I miss the good old LAN party days. Remember those days, you don't have to be online to play a multiplayer game. Then again, technology is blurring the lines of connecting people (digitally).

 

[SG854]

I like playing online. Its a lot of fun. Single player games can get boring after a while.