I’m having to grind my X powers in every mode except Clam Blitz (SZ: 1944, TC: 1816, RM: 1773, CB: 2165) and it’s brutal. I personally think the S+10 minimum from 2 should come back so the skill level is overall higher and teammates wouldn’t be as unreliable (not their fault, but they’re basically being thrown into super touchy stuff)
I still haven't played a lot beyond the matches to actually get a rank, but I think the issue developing here is actually what they're trying to solve. Letting people in without as high of a bar increases the pool of players. Seems like any change made always has some sort of side effect. Finding the perfect balance is tricky.
Having to grind to s+10 every season would take a bit of grinding time even if you were to win every series flawlessly. Then its even worse there cause players of many different ranks will be joining your games
I was 2122 in cb. I lost a single set 2-3 and lost over 100p. I think Nintendo is already grabbing people with a big difference in x power, I just have no idea how big.
Dedicated servers would be a great start, I know you said it increases latency overall but we would be able to have a higher tickrate, which would have a greater impact on the feel of the game seeing as how splatoon 3 online effectively runs at 15 fps.
I mean they're just gonna shut down NS online in like 5-10 years anyway, wouldn't be terrible to have some infrastructure in place so when the switchs successor comes out we won't have to resort back to P2P
It's a minor increase in latency, but non-zero to have dedicated servers. So I felt it necessary to mention it. Splatoon 1 had a higher tick rate without dedicated servers. So I don't know why they halved it. I guess even though the switch gets better performance overall, there must have been some limitation. But I guess that means we can be hopeful that Splatoon 4 will have a higher tick rate with new hardware regardless of having dedicated servers or not.
To be frank what most peoples mean by "fix the online" is pretty much just "Please for the love of god give us something better than 16Hz tickrate", having a 4 frame delay minimum on literally every action in such a fast paced game is unironically a sin. Add to that the fact the netcode really chokes on some situations like wierd NAT on the host's side or stuff like that, sometimes the game just kicks you even if you don't have connection issues because it missed one packet or something The quality is overall better than S1 and S2 but its much less stable as a tradeoff
I could be wrong, but I thought the tick rate was every 2 frames. Maybe I'm thinking of splatoon 2. The disconnection issues are definitely something that needs worked on. But I actually wonder if that's a product of the latency. If the games get too far out of sync, it starts kicking people because it can't resolve which one is the actual game state. At least that's what it seems like to me. But yeah, there are definitely some improvements that could be made.
@@splattuning The tickrate is also every 4 frames in S2 specifically both S2 and 3 process recieved data at 60Hz but send them only at 16 for some reason, i reckon S1 was the only one to have 30Hz or more i can't be sure. From my understanding the new disconnects might be due to how S3 copes with bad NAT-types where restricted nat players were prevented from playing in S1 and 2 S3 runs an hybrid peer to peer + server system. Durning normal play everyone sends data to everyone and the "host" is only here to serves as a sanity check but when a player with a restricted NAT comes in they only ever communicate with the host. i suppose that may cause issues when there's too much going on for the host's interenet to deal with
Very interesting. Maybe I was thinking of S1 then. And yeah. I could tell it had to be a bit of a complex setup with some of the disconnections I've seen. Like for instance when 2 or more people get kicked from both teams. Very insightful. Thank you.
As someone from Australia, latency is a big mess. I'd personally like to take a dedicated server point so that there is consistency between matches because the latency really hurts me as a charger main. Some matches I'm hitting all my shots and then the next match I'm whiffing shots when I'm still aiming the same way. I don't really care too much because I've grown to accept that Australian internet is terrible, but I'd at least like some consistency even if it is terrible.
I guess what I don't understand is why Anarchy (Series) and X Battle are two different queues... I guess I can kinda understand if Anarchy allows people to play outside their division. However, it seems like having Anarchy and X splits the S+ playerbase, which is already small to begin with.
The divisions change your region for every mode I believe. But they have to assign an x power after hitting S+. So I somewhat agree that there shouldn't be two categories. S+ could have an x power and more skill based matchmaking. But I think it's nice to have a high rank mode that still has relatively fast matching as it is now.
i much prefer that it's seperate from anarchy, i somehow got into top 100 tc near the beginning of this season and so instead of being forced to play at that level whenever i want to play tc, i can relax and play anarchy instead. the lack of division back in splatoon 2 was the reason why i stopped playing ranked altogether because a lot of the time i did not have the energy for x rank
The divisions still affect the pool of players you're in. But yes, the matchmaking is determined by an invisible ranking within your division. At least as far as I know. Maybe I'm misremembering, but you pick at the beginning of the season. Not when you get to X rank. If that's the case, it has to affect everything.
Im averaging 1600 x power throughout all modes and seriously i doubt i should have tried x rank in the first place. Getting to S+ is way too easy if u just invest some time. Entry for x should be higher imo. Or like u need to grind to S+ on all modes first to unlock x battles. Some sort of skill checkup is needed.
Yeah, but 1600 x rank is still x rank. If anything S+ is worse since it's less skill based for the matchmaking. I feel like I'm constantly in matches with people who have the x rank badges and I'm definitely nowhere near that good. Edit: But it's almost like they replaced S+ with x rank. Because you actually have different x power per mode like how the ranks used to be.
@@splattuning kinda true with S+ matchmaking being weird. Thats why i only play open. Like series atm has always been harder than x rank. At least on my current lvl.
@@splattuning Part of this is because the badges are awarded live, not at the end of the season. If people ranked in early in the most recent season, they may get a top 3000 badge simply because there weren’t 3000 people in X rank. This is how one of my friends got their badge on the second day of the season.
I understand what you're saying about us as a community needing to step up and stay in our regional divisions which, for the majority of tentatek players, is good advice. However, what needs to be understood is that the *absolute* highest levels of players such as starburst and last resort are actively participating in the highest tournaments they can access. This means they *need* to play against the japanese high level teams because the amount of teams needed to skrim with of equal or higher skill just *doesn't* exist in our region. Starburst especially as there's a gap between them and most of the other teams. A *large* gap.
I totally agree. Unfortunately there isn't a perfect solution. Ideally, the player bases would be equal in size and skill. If they were, it would reduce lag and remove the incentive to switch divisions. But there's no way to make that happen. But I definitely think divisions shouldn't be a choice. And to counter the negative effects, rather than finding no matches, it should default to matchmaking across divisions. It still leaves the lag issue for top level players, but it at least minimizes the risk of high latency for the vast majority of players by removing the choice of divisions. But I see how Nintendo had to decide between two difficult situations. Unfortunately, a mix of the two solutions is currently the best. They either didn't realize it could be a problem or can't easily change it. We'll see what happens.
I mean, I heard about people going crazy over how good rollback netcode is for Smash bros. Melee when Slippi was implementing that. I wonder if they could do that for splatoon, since we still have a person hosting the game and others joining in on that host. Would rollback netcode require a complete overhaul of the games online functions, or is rollback just not good with shooters like splatoon?
To my knowledge, rollback netcode works best when doing a peer to peer connection between two people. Low latency and few players means there's a small chance that it will have to "roll back". But in large multiplayer games, I've been teleported 30 seconds back in time due to a mismatch in my game state and the server. So when it comes to online, there's never a perfect solution. Plus rollback netcode relies on prediction. 1v1 in smash has limited options given that it's a 2d game with a lot of moves with end lag. In my opinion, Splatoon would be too fast paced for that option because there are too many things that can be done at any given point in time. The same could be said if smash, but again, people are usually playing melee 1v1 so there's less going on.
hey there, 2700 xp Tentatek region X ranker, i fully agree with your approach to the growing problem, and I wish others were educated on the matter. Good video and thank you for addressing the fraction of a fraction of a fraction of a community's struggle :)
Things start as a problem for the few, but can snowball into a problem for everyone. And there's a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of a percentage chance that Nintendo sees this video. So maybe it will actually do something.
That's funny. But in his defense, that's the only mode available until level 4 for salmon run and 10 for ranked I think? Turf war and single player that is.
@@splattuning No you could see he had Anarchy battles unlocked but he thought they were just a side mode that he didn't bother checking out. He reviewed turf war as the entire game and then said "You can also do other things like Tableturf, salmon run, and Anarchy nonsense when you get bored of the battles." I'm saying in the West there are legitimately a lot of people who think Splatoon is just turf war, especially people who haven't played it before. I listened to a lot of Call of Duty fans who were upset and Splatoon winning best multiplayer, and most of them said it didn't deserve it because of the lack of real objectives other than "painting the map" I've had to actually show to people that had zero interest in Splatoon that there are gamemodes like control points, payload, and a reverse capture the flag in the game because they didn't know. Nintendo only ever talks about turf war in all advertising, only has turf war in splatfests, which are moments where many more eyes will be watching the game, like Zelda fans for example. It's so many people who believe this and that's a bunch of people who don't even know what they are missing
Yeah. You definitely have a point there. I mean I guess it is the essence of Splatoon, but turf war quickly becomes the "i feel like playing splatoon, but I want to relax" mode. But we might have a different perspective from playing ranked. I'm sure there are a lot of people content with turf war.
You fundamentally do not understand the argument for saying the connection is not Nintendo's problem. Yes. 10 frames latency is the minimum lag that can't be fixed. However, 99.9% of all connection issues are Nintendo's fault and Splatoon 3's online is behind Halo 3's online, all the way in 2007. You talk about hosts, that IS the problem, Nintendo is choosing not to have dedicated servers to save a quick buck.
Well the 10 frames of latency is only when playing cross-continental matches. But dedicated servers only serve to stabilize the connection. The latency for a dedicated server is actually even higher. If someone is in the US but playing in Takoroka, the latency would be 5 frames to the server, 1 frame to the player you're interacting with, 1 frame back to the server, and finally 5 more frames back to the player in the US. So it would actually add latency with the benefit of possibly providing a more stable connection. But the connection quality of the users would still be a factor since a player disconnecting early in the match would still result in a draw. And when interacting with the server, latency issues would still be problematic for gameplay. So the experience would more likely be improved for everyone playing on a server in their division's region(although with a tiny bit of extra latency), but it would not automatically solve any latency issues that are caused by long distance connections. The connection issues are caused by poor internet connections 99.9% of the time because Nintendo doesn't have servers outside of matchmaking. The finger can be pointed at Nintendo for their inaction, but the quality is currently entirely dependent on our connection quality. So it's disingenuous to say it's Nintendo's fault.
@@splattuning Right, unfortunately, not having game breaking connection issues when the user's internet is perfect is more important than latency. Once again you know nothing about the actual issue and obsess over an issue that makes gameplay uncomfortable rather than an issue that makes the game unplayable. Not having dedicated servers is absolutely 100% the cause of all connection problems for the majority of players, barring only those with horrible internet. On a game with the most basic of server quality assurance, one can expect having good internet means they will never ever disconnect involuntarily. In Splatoon on the other hand, this can happen multiple times per hour, even on a fiber optic wired connection with no hiccips in either your hardware or the ISP's hardware. To say that 99.9% of disconnects are not Nintendo's fault is an outright lie. 2 frames less latency are not worth having your rights as a competitor violated multiple times a day, given losses instead of wins due to Nintendo's own issues. Latency is *NOT* the issue. It is a system that causes frequent disconnects when it is *EASY* to create a system where nobody except those on McDonalds wifi loses connection to matches.
The video isn't about connection issues though. It's a very narrow scope talking about a specific issue that x battles are having. Any issues you're referring to would be an entirely different topic.
Based in nz and in takoroka. I’m 1900x power but anytime flc is playing (based in Australia with 2600+x power) I seem to get stuck in games against him. This makes me think that Nintendo already puts a very high emphasis on connection quality. Having said that, this season I do see more lag in games when there are less Japanese players; so that might be American/European players?
It could be. I mean there's not really any way to tell. Even the name is only a good guess, but it's not a foregone conclusion. But splatoon 2 supposedly nearly locked players to playing with other close by players. Maybe not for every mode, but for most. I can't give them too much flak because there really isn't an absolutely perfect solution.
I think its reasonable to blame Nintendo's American Splatoon 3 advertisements and commercials for why a majority here only play Turf War. So infuriating.
NA X rank is becoming unplayable. Sometimes I have up to 30 minutes of wait time. Even when im like top 400 it still can be 10+ minutes. At top 10 its almost impossible to find games (taking the full rotations worth of time)
Yeah. I don't have to deal with that currently, but I recognized it as an issue some people have to deal with and made the video to hopefully raise awareness so it can be fixed sooner than later. Unfortunately, even the best solution I can think of is less than perfect for everyone. But maybe it will inspire someone else to think of something better.
I wonder if it would help if S+0 min stays, but perhaps the player now has to win a regular ranked 'series'. afterwards, the player then has to do the same process of playing through a X series to get initially placed. I think S+ 4 or 5 would be fine to test initially. A lot of the good players are older players from all the way back in the early Splatoon 1 or 2 days and simply don't have as much time to rank to S+ 10 and then be able to play X ranked. I think data transparency (each month / season) would really help the X ranked playerbase understand what challenges there are in balancing X ranked matches better. Like how many players are even in S+ 0 let alone even S+ 1 or 2? what are the percentages / numbers for weapon type (shooters, chargers, rollers, etc) in S+0 and above / X ranked? As some others have mentioned, Series and X ranked should be separate. Open / Series ranked is moreso ranked for also trying out other weapons that are your secondaries or want to know the ins and out of less popular weapons. The biggest issue is the P2P and latency. I still get plenty of moments where it's suspect why certain scenarios didn't result in a trade, or the opponent or I outfragging. FPS games always will at times have this issue and devs will always have to do some rough interpolation depending on player's pings and what the servers log actions wise...but not nearly as inconsistent as in Splatoon 3.
Thank you for the thoughtful comment. It's definitely a careful balance to have the modes available for people without too much hassle and keeping it exclusive enough. I think X battles probably have the least latency issues though due to people taking it a little more serious and mostly playing on a hard wired connection I would imagine. But yet, I know exactly what you mean about "hey wait a minute, he shouldn't have been able to splat me yet" or "wow, I thought he had me". The latency is never going to be perfect with such a long distance. I think that's why they encourage players to stay in their region, but without the exact same amount of players in both regions, the bigger pool always has more appeal due to the higher skill ceiling. I don't envy the developers because it's almost a no win situation. They just need to make it the best for 99% of players and as good as possible for the 1%.
Splatoon 3’s ranking systems are an overall downgrade from 2’s. Because of the new medal system you can get more points and rank up even when you’re losing and on the opposite side being able to go into -1000 rank points is ridiculous. I really do want the Splatoon 2 meter system back and for the glico score to show again; this whole new -2 ranks every season is just fomo to make people grind rank levels and I’m a much bigger fan of people going down just because they’re losing too much by themselves, not because the game forces them to. Not a massive fan of the new divisons for X rank either. Because all the best people are leaving to JP this causes the people below the best to follow in order to fight the best and thus a domino effect happens because people can’t even get games at high X level anymore. Everyone already knows that the western divison’s skill level and size is just smaller than JP’s. But if you switch servers you have to deal with latency and etc. Overall a tricky issue to deal with. Also think they should up the requirements for X… some people I’ve seen in this mode I question how they got to S+ in the first place
Yep. That's the long and short of it. I give them credit for at least attempting to change it in the aspirations of improvement. You never know if you already have the best solution. But there's definitely some tweaks that need made here.
I stopped caring playing rank because of disconnection. I can't even reach to S+ now. I just play Play turf war. I wish there is also a competitive matches for turf war aside from Splatfest. I basically played this game because of turf war. also, having a (negative) -rank discourage me more playing.
If you aren't playing on a wired connection, I definitely recommend trying that. If that's already the case, it could be a setting in your router or other people using a lot of bandwidth on your connection. Unfortunately, Splatoon's online seems pretty sensitive to any disruptions in the connection.
20 ms would actually be like theoretically the best ping you could get. Assuming the two consoles were directly connected by a giant cable. But I mean it's definitely possible that the internet infrastructure will improve to get closer to that number.
This wouldn't be happening if the continents were still Pangea... Jk. Even tho I'm not at all one of those super competitive players i want everyone to have a good time playing the game, so i hope Nintendo does the necessary changes to fix this x rank issue.
I don't want to be the Splatoon is doomed guy, but I wanted to address it in the hopes that it doesn't snowball into a game-wide issue. Like for instance if it creeps into S+. Then it starts affecting a considerably larger amount of people. But I think most people, given the choice, would rather have lag than no match to play at all. Hence why some players decide to change divisions.
I’m having to grind my X powers in every mode except Clam Blitz (SZ: 1944, TC: 1816, RM: 1773, CB: 2165) and it’s brutal. I personally think the S+10 minimum from 2 should come back so the skill level is overall higher and teammates wouldn’t be as unreliable (not their fault, but they’re basically being thrown into super touchy stuff)
I still haven't played a lot beyond the matches to actually get a rank, but I think the issue developing here is actually what they're trying to solve. Letting people in without as high of a bar increases the pool of players.
Seems like any change made always has some sort of side effect. Finding the perfect balance is tricky.
Having to grind to s+10 every season would take a bit of grinding time even if you were to win every series flawlessly. Then its even worse there cause players of many different ranks will be joining your games
I was 2122 in cb. I lost a single set 2-3 and lost over 100p. I think Nintendo is already grabbing people with a big difference in x power, I just have no idea how big.
@@carlos41519 simple solution, have 0.000000000000001 braincells and take season deranking and inability to rank down out. return to the rank meter
A lot of people say Nintendo needs to fix their online, but never say 'how?'.
Well you know. Just fix it. In the obvious way, clearly. That's what they mean.
$20/year
Dedicated servers would be a great start, I know you said it increases latency overall but we would be able to have a higher tickrate, which would have a greater impact on the feel of the game seeing as how splatoon 3 online effectively runs at 15 fps.
I mean they're just gonna shut down NS online in like 5-10 years anyway, wouldn't be terrible to have some infrastructure in place so when the switchs successor comes out we won't have to resort back to P2P
It's a minor increase in latency, but non-zero to have dedicated servers. So I felt it necessary to mention it.
Splatoon 1 had a higher tick rate without dedicated servers. So I don't know why they halved it. I guess even though the switch gets better performance overall, there must have been some limitation.
But I guess that means we can be hopeful that Splatoon 4 will have a higher tick rate with new hardware regardless of having dedicated servers or not.
To be frank what most peoples mean by "fix the online" is pretty much just "Please for the love of god give us something better than 16Hz tickrate", having a 4 frame delay minimum on literally every action in such a fast paced game is unironically a sin.
Add to that the fact the netcode really chokes on some situations like wierd NAT on the host's side or stuff like that, sometimes the game just kicks you even if you don't have connection issues because it missed one packet or something
The quality is overall better than S1 and S2 but its much less stable as a tradeoff
I could be wrong, but I thought the tick rate was every 2 frames. Maybe I'm thinking of splatoon 2.
The disconnection issues are definitely something that needs worked on. But I actually wonder if that's a product of the latency. If the games get too far out of sync, it starts kicking people because it can't resolve which one is the actual game state. At least that's what it seems like to me.
But yeah, there are definitely some improvements that could be made.
@@splattuning The tickrate is also every 4 frames in S2 specifically both S2 and 3 process recieved data at 60Hz but send them only at 16 for some reason, i reckon S1 was the only one to have 30Hz or more i can't be sure.
From my understanding the new disconnects might be due to how S3 copes with bad NAT-types where restricted nat players were prevented from playing in S1 and 2 S3 runs an hybrid peer to peer + server system.
Durning normal play everyone sends data to everyone and the "host" is only here to serves as a sanity check but when a player with a restricted NAT comes in they only ever communicate with the host. i suppose that may cause issues when there's too much going on for the host's interenet to deal with
Very interesting. Maybe I was thinking of S1 then.
And yeah. I could tell it had to be a bit of a complex setup with some of the disconnections I've seen. Like for instance when 2 or more people get kicked from both teams.
Very insightful. Thank you.
@@splattuning Np and yw.
Keep up the good work mate
As someone from Australia, latency is a big mess. I'd personally like to take a dedicated server point so that there is consistency between matches because the latency really hurts me as a charger main. Some matches I'm hitting all my shots and then the next match I'm whiffing shots when I'm still aiming the same way. I don't really care too much because I've grown to accept that Australian internet is terrible, but I'd at least like some consistency even if it is terrible.
I guess what I don't understand is why Anarchy (Series) and X Battle are two different queues... I guess I can kinda understand if Anarchy allows people to play outside their division. However, it seems like having Anarchy and X splits the S+ playerbase, which is already small to begin with.
The divisions change your region for every mode I believe.
But they have to assign an x power after hitting S+. So I somewhat agree that there shouldn't be two categories. S+ could have an x power and more skill based matchmaking. But I think it's nice to have a high rank mode that still has relatively fast matching as it is now.
i much prefer that it's seperate from anarchy, i somehow got into top 100 tc near the beginning of this season and so instead of being forced to play at that level whenever i want to play tc, i can relax and play anarchy instead. the lack of division back in splatoon 2 was the reason why i stopped playing ranked altogether because a lot of the time i did not have the energy for x rank
Options are definitely always nice.
@@splattuning the divisions only affect X battles.
Not Anarchy MM as they are defined by Glicko rating across all ranks.
The divisions still affect the pool of players you're in. But yes, the matchmaking is determined by an invisible ranking within your division.
At least as far as I know. Maybe I'm misremembering, but you pick at the beginning of the season. Not when you get to X rank. If that's the case, it has to affect everything.
Im averaging 1600 x power throughout all modes and seriously i doubt i should have tried x rank in the first place. Getting to S+ is way too easy if u just invest some time. Entry for x should be higher imo. Or like u need to grind to S+ on all modes first to unlock x battles. Some sort of skill checkup is needed.
Yeah, but 1600 x rank is still x rank. If anything S+ is worse since it's less skill based for the matchmaking. I feel like I'm constantly in matches with people who have the x rank badges and I'm definitely nowhere near that good.
Edit: But it's almost like they replaced S+ with x rank. Because you actually have different x power per mode like how the ranks used to be.
@@splattuning kinda true with S+ matchmaking being weird. Thats why i only play open. Like series atm has always been harder than x rank. At least on my current lvl.
@@splattuning Part of this is because the badges are awarded live, not at the end of the season. If people ranked in early in the most recent season, they may get a top 3000 badge simply because there weren’t 3000 people in X rank. This is how one of my friends got their badge on the second day of the season.
I had no idea. I thought they were awarded at the end of the season. That would explain things.
I understand what you're saying about us as a community needing to step up and stay in our regional divisions which, for the majority of tentatek players, is good advice. However, what needs to be understood is that the *absolute* highest levels of players such as starburst and last resort are actively participating in the highest tournaments they can access. This means they *need* to play against the japanese high level teams because the amount of teams needed to skrim with of equal or higher skill just *doesn't* exist in our region.
Starburst especially as there's a gap between them and most of the other teams. A *large* gap.
I totally agree. Unfortunately there isn't a perfect solution. Ideally, the player bases would be equal in size and skill. If they were, it would reduce lag and remove the incentive to switch divisions. But there's no way to make that happen.
But I definitely think divisions shouldn't be a choice. And to counter the negative effects, rather than finding no matches, it should default to matchmaking across divisions. It still leaves the lag issue for top level players, but it at least minimizes the risk of high latency for the vast majority of players by removing the choice of divisions.
But I see how Nintendo had to decide between two difficult situations. Unfortunately, a mix of the two solutions is currently the best. They either didn't realize it could be a problem or can't easily change it. We'll see what happens.
I mean, I heard about people going crazy over how good rollback netcode is for Smash bros. Melee when Slippi was implementing that. I wonder if they could do that for splatoon, since we still have a person hosting the game and others joining in on that host. Would rollback netcode require a complete overhaul of the games online functions, or is rollback just not good with shooters like splatoon?
To my knowledge, rollback netcode works best when doing a peer to peer connection between two people. Low latency and few players means there's a small chance that it will have to "roll back".
But in large multiplayer games, I've been teleported 30 seconds back in time due to a mismatch in my game state and the server. So when it comes to online, there's never a perfect solution.
Plus rollback netcode relies on prediction. 1v1 in smash has limited options given that it's a 2d game with a lot of moves with end lag. In my opinion, Splatoon would be too fast paced for that option because there are too many things that can be done at any given point in time. The same could be said if smash, but again, people are usually playing melee 1v1 so there's less going on.
hey there, 2700 xp Tentatek region X ranker, i fully agree with your approach to the growing problem, and I wish others were educated on the matter. Good video and thank you for addressing the fraction of a fraction of a fraction of a community's struggle :)
Things start as a problem for the few, but can snowball into a problem for everyone. And there's a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of a percentage chance that Nintendo sees this video. So maybe it will actually do something.
There's a TH-camr I followed who made a positive review of Splatoon 3, and in the review he legitimately thought that Turf War was the only game mode.
That's funny. But in his defense, that's the only mode available until level 4 for salmon run and 10 for ranked I think? Turf war and single player that is.
@@splattuning No you could see he had Anarchy battles unlocked but he thought they were just a side mode that he didn't bother checking out. He reviewed turf war as the entire game and then said "You can also do other things like Tableturf, salmon run, and Anarchy nonsense when you get bored of the battles."
I'm saying in the West there are legitimately a lot of people who think Splatoon is just turf war, especially people who haven't played it before. I listened to a lot of Call of Duty fans who were upset and Splatoon winning best multiplayer, and most of them said it didn't deserve it because of the lack of real objectives other than "painting the map"
I've had to actually show to people that had zero interest in Splatoon that there are gamemodes like control points, payload, and a reverse capture the flag in the game because they didn't know.
Nintendo only ever talks about turf war in all advertising, only has turf war in splatfests, which are moments where many more eyes will be watching the game, like Zelda fans for example. It's so many people who believe this and that's a bunch of people who don't even know what they are missing
Yeah. You definitely have a point there. I mean I guess it is the essence of Splatoon, but turf war quickly becomes the "i feel like playing splatoon, but I want to relax" mode.
But we might have a different perspective from playing ranked. I'm sure there are a lot of people content with turf war.
You fundamentally do not understand the argument for saying the connection is not Nintendo's problem. Yes. 10 frames latency is the minimum lag that can't be fixed. However, 99.9% of all connection issues are Nintendo's fault and Splatoon 3's online is behind Halo 3's online, all the way in 2007. You talk about hosts, that IS the problem, Nintendo is choosing not to have dedicated servers to save a quick buck.
Well the 10 frames of latency is only when playing cross-continental matches. But dedicated servers only serve to stabilize the connection. The latency for a dedicated server is actually even higher.
If someone is in the US but playing in Takoroka, the latency would be 5 frames to the server, 1 frame to the player you're interacting with, 1 frame back to the server, and finally 5 more frames back to the player in the US. So it would actually add latency with the benefit of possibly providing a more stable connection.
But the connection quality of the users would still be a factor since a player disconnecting early in the match would still result in a draw. And when interacting with the server, latency issues would still be problematic for gameplay.
So the experience would more likely be improved for everyone playing on a server in their division's region(although with a tiny bit of extra latency), but it would not automatically solve any latency issues that are caused by long distance connections.
The connection issues are caused by poor internet connections 99.9% of the time because Nintendo doesn't have servers outside of matchmaking. The finger can be pointed at Nintendo for their inaction, but the quality is currently entirely dependent on our connection quality. So it's disingenuous to say it's Nintendo's fault.
@@splattuning Right, unfortunately, not having game breaking connection issues when the user's internet is perfect is more important than latency. Once again you know nothing about the actual issue and obsess over an issue that makes gameplay uncomfortable rather than an issue that makes the game unplayable. Not having dedicated servers is absolutely 100% the cause of all connection problems for the majority of players, barring only those with horrible internet. On a game with the most basic of server quality assurance, one can expect having good internet means they will never ever disconnect involuntarily. In Splatoon on the other hand, this can happen multiple times per hour, even on a fiber optic wired connection with no hiccips in either your hardware or the ISP's hardware. To say that 99.9% of disconnects are not Nintendo's fault is an outright lie. 2 frames less latency are not worth having your rights as a competitor violated multiple times a day, given losses instead of wins due to Nintendo's own issues. Latency is *NOT* the issue. It is a system that causes frequent disconnects when it is *EASY* to create a system where nobody except those on McDonalds wifi loses connection to matches.
The video isn't about connection issues though. It's a very narrow scope talking about a specific issue that x battles are having. Any issues you're referring to would be an entirely different topic.
My rank is so low that it's plastic... oh wait, that's CSGO.
Based in nz and in takoroka. I’m 1900x power but anytime flc is playing (based in Australia with 2600+x power) I seem to get stuck in games against him. This makes me think that Nintendo already puts a very high emphasis on connection quality.
Having said that, this season I do see more lag in games when there are less Japanese players; so that might be American/European players?
It could be. I mean there's not really any way to tell. Even the name is only a good guess, but it's not a foregone conclusion.
But splatoon 2 supposedly nearly locked players to playing with other close by players. Maybe not for every mode, but for most.
I can't give them too much flak because there really isn't an absolutely perfect solution.
I think its reasonable to blame Nintendo's American Splatoon 3 advertisements and commercials for why a majority here only play Turf War. So infuriating.
I feel like that could be applied for the previous games
Fair point. But I feel like that would probably be the case regardless. It's basically the main mode of the game. Everyone has to start there.
NA X rank is becoming unplayable. Sometimes I have up to 30 minutes of wait time. Even when im like top 400 it still can be 10+ minutes. At top 10 its almost impossible to find games (taking the full rotations worth of time)
Yeah. I don't have to deal with that currently, but I recognized it as an issue some people have to deal with and made the video to hopefully raise awareness so it can be fixed sooner than later.
Unfortunately, even the best solution I can think of is less than perfect for everyone. But maybe it will inspire someone else to think of something better.
I wonder if it would help if S+0 min stays, but perhaps the player now has to win a regular ranked 'series'. afterwards, the player then has to do the same process of playing through a X series to get initially placed. I think S+ 4 or 5 would be fine to test initially. A lot of the good players are older players from all the way back in the early Splatoon 1 or 2 days and simply don't have as much time to rank to S+ 10 and then be able to play X ranked.
I think data transparency (each month / season) would really help the X ranked playerbase understand what challenges there are in balancing X ranked matches better. Like how many players are even in S+ 0 let alone even S+ 1 or 2? what are the percentages / numbers for weapon type (shooters, chargers, rollers, etc) in S+0 and above / X ranked?
As some others have mentioned, Series and X ranked should be separate. Open / Series ranked is moreso ranked for also trying out other weapons that are your secondaries or want to know the ins and out of less popular weapons. The biggest issue is the P2P and latency. I still get plenty of moments where it's suspect why certain scenarios didn't result in a trade, or the opponent or I outfragging. FPS games always will at times have this issue and devs will always have to do some rough interpolation depending on player's pings and what the servers log actions wise...but not nearly as inconsistent as in Splatoon 3.
Thank you for the thoughtful comment. It's definitely a careful balance to have the modes available for people without too much hassle and keeping it exclusive enough.
I think X battles probably have the least latency issues though due to people taking it a little more serious and mostly playing on a hard wired connection I would imagine. But yet, I know exactly what you mean about "hey wait a minute, he shouldn't have been able to splat me yet" or "wow, I thought he had me". The latency is never going to be perfect with such a long distance. I think that's why they encourage players to stay in their region, but without the exact same amount of players in both regions, the bigger pool always has more appeal due to the higher skill ceiling.
I don't envy the developers because it's almost a no win situation. They just need to make it the best for 99% of players and as good as possible for the 1%.
tbh we just have to get more popular as a community.
Splatoon 3’s ranking systems are an overall downgrade from 2’s. Because of the new medal system you can get more points and rank up even when you’re losing and on the opposite side being able to go into -1000 rank points is ridiculous. I really do want the Splatoon 2 meter system back and for the glico score to show again; this whole new -2 ranks every season is just fomo to make people grind rank levels and I’m a much bigger fan of people going down just because they’re losing too much by themselves, not because the game forces them to.
Not a massive fan of the new divisons for X rank either. Because all the best people are leaving to JP this causes the people below the best to follow in order to fight the best and thus a domino effect happens because people can’t even get games at high X level anymore. Everyone already knows that the western divison’s skill level and size is just smaller than JP’s. But if you switch servers you have to deal with latency and etc. Overall a tricky issue to deal with. Also think they should up the requirements for X… some people I’ve seen in this mode I question how they got to S+ in the first place
Yep. That's the long and short of it.
I give them credit for at least attempting to change it in the aspirations of improvement. You never know if you already have the best solution.
But there's definitely some tweaks that need made here.
I stopped caring playing rank because of disconnection. I can't even reach to S+ now. I just play Play turf war. I wish there is also a competitive matches for turf war aside from Splatfest. I basically played this game because of turf war.
also, having a (negative) -rank discourage me more playing.
If you aren't playing on a wired connection, I definitely recommend trying that. If that's already the case, it could be a setting in your router or other people using a lot of bandwidth on your connection.
Unfortunately, Splatoon's online seems pretty sensitive to any disruptions in the connection.
I live in Australia so I don’t know what to think.
Yeah. There isn't much you can do about it. I'm guessing you have to deal with high latency even when picking your region's division.
The best way to fix this problem, make everyone's internet better 🌝 sub 20 ping connections from the Americas to Australia
20 ms would actually be like theoretically the best ping you could get. Assuming the two consoles were directly connected by a giant cable.
But I mean it's definitely possible that the internet infrastructure will improve to get closer to that number.
As someone who lives in ireland i think europe and na servers should be seperated
Probably. I guess they were afraid of having too few people in each division.
This wouldn't be happening if the continents were still Pangea... Jk. Even tho I'm not at all one of those super competitive players i want everyone to have a good time playing the game, so i hope Nintendo does the necessary changes to fix this x rank issue.
I don't want to be the Splatoon is doomed guy, but I wanted to address it in the hopes that it doesn't snowball into a game-wide issue. Like for instance if it creeps into S+. Then it starts affecting a considerably larger amount of people.
But I think most people, given the choice, would rather have lag than no match to play at all. Hence why some players decide to change divisions.
Get rid of the division
great video