Context
Chess is a game of strategy — anticipating your opponent’s moves, and manipulating them into making moves that are advantageous to you. Fighting games are like modern high-tech and high-speed games of chess, but with a lot more to consider (e.g., speed, timing, positioning, stats, etc.). In fact, they are also a major “spectator sport” (an e-sport), and even a career path for some. Some people take it so seriously that it is their livelihood, just like any other athlete who gets sponsored by a gaming company. That is why the release of Super Smash Brothers Ultimate (Smash Ultimate) has had millions of people talking. And unfortunately, not all of it is good.
If you look at the most popular fighting games in the world, at least one of the games in the “Smash Bros” series is inevitably at the top. In fact, one website puts all five Smash Bros titles within the top 10, showing just how popular this series is. It’s exciting to watch, it’s fun to play with friends, and over time, it has become the most competitive fighting game series in the world. This is pretty surprising, considering it is such a non-traditional fighting game that some people don’t even consider it a fighting game at all. It has, in fact, spawned a sub-genre of similar games called “platform fighting games,” which many smaller game companies used to model their own games on. Of course, none of these games (which many people call “smash-clones”) are as popular as Smash Bros.
Smash is made by Nintendo — arguably the most famous video game company in the world. They capitalize on a huge cast of characters, such as those the nostalgia-inducing ones that haven’t appeared in a game for generations (e.g., Duck Hunt, Mr. Game & Watch), to those who came from 3rd-party companies whose games were big hits in their own right (e.g., Solid Snake, Bayonetta, Cloud Strife). In other words, Smash Ultimate required an unbelievable amount of work to create… not just because the game must have been incredibly difficult to balance over 75 playable characters, but also since they had to jump through tons of legal hoops and get licensing deals, probably from more companies than any other game before it.
This should paint the picture of a company that has worked incredibly hard to please its fans. And considering how many millions of people buy these games, Nintendo should care. After just a few weeks, Smash Ultimate has become the fastest-selling Nintendo game ever. In short: Smash Bros is not just an incredible success story, it is a game that is so important to Nintendo that it has basically become a symbol of every console Nintendo has ever created since the Nintendo 64 — where the first Smash Bros was released, in 1999. Every console has their own Smash Bros.
However, much of the success and popularity of the Smash Bros series actually came naturally from fans, not from Nintendo. Nintendo designed the game to be versatile as either a party game or a competitive game; but the competitive players took the game to a new level. It was the players who began organizing competitive tournaments; Nintendo put in absolutely no effort to facilitate the competitive community whatsoever in the beginning, and even today there is not very much support. This article will discuss how Nintendo should actually listen to its fans, and hopefully improve the Smash Ultimate online experience.
July 30, 2019 Update: Today, the number of copies of SSBU sold worldwide was 14.73 million. This announcement came alongside the patch for version 4.0.0, which thankfully adds at least one feature that actually matters (I’m excluding the new character which was announced a while ago, as well as features no one cares about, such as time-limited final smash meters, new Amiibos, new skins for Mii Fighters, a better spectator mode that I don’t think anyone ever uses anyways, improved in-game video editing, etc.); and that one useful feature is online tournaments (although adding a very-easy setting for their boring adventure mode is also a good idea for casual gamers). The fact that they had added this is actually very important, because it means they are finally beginning to take their competitive users more seriously.
Nintendo has done well to try to improve the overall UX, though they still have yet to address virtually all of the issues I discussed below — the fundamental flaws. Overall, the fact that they are adding to the game is definitely a good thing; I just wish they were better at user research.
In a Nutshell
Problem: Users are able to select their Preferred Rules for what matches they would like to play online. However, users are forced into games that they don’t want to play (i.e. their preferences are disregarded), and they cannot opt out of them before the match starts OR quit after it starts. They are forced to play the entire match, or else be temporarily banned if they disconnect from a game too many times in a short period of time.
Solution: Users should be allowed to make strict restrictions, not preferences. They should be able to filter exactly the type of matches they want to participate in, and not be forced to play with the rules they don’t want.
Note: There are tons of things to complain about regarding the Smash Ultimate online experience, but I am only discussing in detail the issues related to matchmaking in this article, because it is a problem that can be solved easily.
In-Depth
Everyone Hates It
I actually wrote this article only a few weeks after the game was released. Fortunately, the game has had a few patches that have improved the situation; unfortunately, the improvements have only moved the online made from “flat-out unplayable” to “egregious embarrassment.” At the time I wrote the firsti draft of this article, typing “smash ultimate online” into the YouTube search bar would bring up these auto-filled results (see below). Not “How to play Smash Ultimate online” or “Smash Ultimate online tips,” but “smash ultimate online sucks.” Clearly, players are not happy with it. So where did Nintendo go wrong?
The problem, as with many cases of bad UX, is that they are making an assumption. The assumption here is that players would rather play any match — even one with rules they don’t enjoy — rather than wait until they could play a match with rules they actually want.
This assumption is just… bad. Really, truly, stupefyingly bad.
The fact that Nintendo got this so wrong just shows how little they understand about online gameplay and competitive games in general. If only they had just asked/listened to their users, they would have known that people hate the whole concept of “preferences;” but clearly Nintendo did not do the right user research. It appears that the main thing they heard from users was about which characters they would like to join the roster in the future. This is undoubtedly valuable, but Nintendo is a AAA game studio, with an absurd amount of resources and experience under its belt. There really is no excuse for this. In fact, the only reason that there is not more outrage is that the offline game (i.e. multiplayer with other people on the same console) is just… so much fun. So I am not trying to take that away from them — it’s an incredible game offline. Thankfully, they got that right.
Know Your Audience
Although Nintendo always wants to satisfy their user base, they have gradually tried to appeal more and more to the casual gamer. Nintendo has come up with innovative ways to create a simple UX in many of their flagship titles, often with their games involving charming and colourful visuals with extremely — even impressively — simple controls. While many people have even complained about how many of these games are “too easy,” I think this is more a reflection of the fact that many skilled players are not quite the target market for such casual games. What I mean to say is that Nintendo is not wrong for appealing to casual gamers; but for Smash Ultimate in particular, the situation is complicated because it tries to appeal to both casual and competitive players. Theoretically this is ambitious but not a problem; but in practice, the issue is that simply Nintendo doesn’t understand how to appeal to competitive players.
Honestly, it’s not that hard. There are essentially two types of players: a) Those who play just for fun (i.e. as a party game), and b) those who play competitively. Competitive players aren’t necessarily those who want to compete in esports competitions or anything like that… but they simply want the results of a game to be indicative of skill, not influenced by chance. Casual gamers of Smash Ultimate play with things like randomly-dropped and overpowered items, and random environmental effects — all of which detract from the result of a match being attributed to skill. For example, you wouldn’t want to watch an Olympic event where every athlete is given a backpack of totally different items, like some get active mouse-traps, or are filled with a bag of angry bees; while others have baseball bats or laser guns. …Okay wait, bad example; because I would totally watch that…
The point is, competitive players want to play a simple match with even teams, 3 stocks (the default), no items, usually on a flat stage, with no random environmental hazards. However, despite picking your competitive “preferences,” you will undoubtedly be thrown into 4-player free-for-all with items, timed 3-player free-for-alls, etc. In such cases, the winner is not necessarily the most skilled, but the one who runs away longest for the other players to weaken each other. This UX rewards unskilled players and incentivizes everyone to run away, or to grab items and ignore the rest of the activity onscreen — not a contest of skill. Therefore, competitive players get absolutely no satisfaction from playing such a game, even if they win.
How bad could the online UX be, really?
The short answer: outrageous and excruciating.
Here is a sadly incomplete list of issues with the online experience.
- Players can’t skip a match-up that has been made before it starts, such as when they see that the rules are totally not what they want (e.g. items, free-for-all, etc.)
- Players cannot leave a match after it has begun (even after they have been eliminated, where doing so would not impact the match in any way)
- If players turn off their machine/shut off the game entirely before a match has concluded, the next time you start the game, you’ll get a warning saying that leaving a match before it concludes may result in you being restricted from online play (which is also even true if you get disconnected due to a problem with your internet connection, even though it’s not your fault)
- The online ranking system is so ridiculous that no game outside the series has ever adopted it
- If you find some player(s) that you enjoy playing with, you can do a rematch, but you cannot change the settings or change your character until the match ends (e.g. you might enjoy a 2v2 and opt to do a rematch, but for the next match, it become a 2v2 with items, and you can’t do anything about it)
- Whenever you play online solo (i.e. when you’re alone, as opposed to with a friend who is also on your device), your result factors into your online rank. Therefore, if you play a 1v1 match with no items, and opt to do a rematch afterwards, the next match might suddenly take you and your opponent and throw you both into a 4-player free-for-all with items, the result of which would affect your rank. Furthermore, it is impossible to have 2v2 matches factor into your rank.
- You cannot invite friends to join your match online (you would have to contact them outside the game, since you cannot even contact them through the Nintendo Switch)
- The lag can get horrendous, due to the fact that connections are peer-to-peer, rather than on a dedicated server
Many people have pointed out that the online experience has become even worse than the previous game in the series. As the picture below indicate, there were options to play “for fun” (i.e. non-ranked) and the competitive “for glory” (i.e. ranked). But for a company that wants to appeal to both casual and competitive players, it is perplexing that they would lump everyone into the same place. Regardless of playing competitively or not, your match will be ranked.
Without this distinction, no one is happy with a reliance on preferred rules. Preferences are not filters, they are just weakly-influential variables inside a shoddy algorithm that has left the Smash fans dumbfounded and outraged.
When it comes to the top-level online options, you have Quickplay and Background Matchmaking (As I mentioned above, this article is not going to talk about Battle Arenas, which is a whole other set of bad UX design). For all intents and purposes, they are literally the exact same thing.
There must be something different about it, right? Theoretically, yes… but in practice, no. Quickplay matches you up with opponents as quickly as possible. Background Matchmaking theoretically enables you to set your preferences and then do something else in the background (such as an offline match) while waiting for a new match to be made in the background. But in practice, it tries to match you as quickly as possible… which means you never have time to do anything while you are waiting anything. In fact, I have never played more than 2 seconds of an offline match before a being sent into an online match — but again, with rules that I don’t want.
Therefore, the answer to this preferences issue is staring at Nintendo right in the face; and yet they somehow still haven’t realized it.
Give Me Filters, Not Preferences
Nintendo assumes that players are impatient, but they don’t realize a few obvious things: 1) Players (especially competitive ones) would rather play matches they want to play rather than being forced into a match they don’t want to play (especially when it means your rank lowers if you lose), 2) There are millions of players, so any conceivable preferred ruleset should have hundreds, if not thousands, of other players using the same ruleset at any given time; which means it won’t take long for games to match anyways.
Since Background Matchmaking has already been made, Nintendo has already done most of the hard work. They can keep Quickplay the same as it always was (i.e. terrible), while making Background Matchmaking a strict filter rather than a set of “preferences” (by which, they actually mean “suggestions”). The worst-case scenario would then be that it might take a few minutes to get the exact right match that you want… but in the meantime, you could do whatever you want offline (i.e. the same rules that you want, but with the computer or your friend on the same console).
Filtering matches by type is so incredibly common that it’s absurd for Nintendo not to do it. Even Smash-clones like Brawlhalla (which, in all honesty, is a quite unique game on its own) do it much better, despite coming from a much smaller gaming company with far fewer resources and experience under its belt. For example, when you start up Brawlhalla, it offers you the choice between Quickplay (they call it “Play”), Ranked matches, or Custom Game Rooms (i.e. a significantly better counterpart to Smash Ultimate’s “Battle Arenas,” which is terrible for reasons I don’t have time to explore in this already long article).
Selecting “Play” gives you several more specific options (e.g., 1v1, 2v2, and free-for-all), while “Ranked” allow you to specify 1v1 or 2v2 matches with competitive rules (i.e., you can damage your teammates, which makes the game more strategic); and custom game rooms not only allow you to filter out options you don’t want, but even pick the dedicated servers that allow you to potentially reduce lag. Since Nintendo Online requires an annual fee, many Smash fans have been wondering where the money is going (especially considering that Brawlhalla is actually completely free to play). In short, Brawlhalla puts Nintendo to shame, and Nintendo should really learn from it.
The Bottom Line
Nintendo should (but probably won’t) learn from the companies it inspired. Although they do a lot of things right, and they are giants and innovators in the industry, it is mind-boggling to think how far behind (i.e., decades) the rest of the market they are in terms of online play. The solution I presented above does not even come close to solving all of their unacceptable problems; but it is absolutely the least amount of work that Nintendo has to do to in order to significantly improve the online UX for its users.
Preferences sounds good in theory, but the fact that they are disregarded so often makes them worse than useless. Because rather than not being able to find a match that you’d like to play in, you have to first slog through matches you hate to get to the wants you enjoy, and potentially be punished for them having them influence your rank. If people are able to play offline however they want, waiting longer for the type of competitive match they desire is not a problem at all.
All Nintendo needed was a bit of basic user research. Instead, they gave us a UX that people hate.
