Entitled for paying $300 on the console, $60 on the game, and a monthly fee to my internet provider? Yes, yes I am. Paying for an online service is only acceptable if said service is decent to begin with... but P2P isn't just bad, it's actually not a service at all, and I'm not sure you understand that. The other consoles can get away with paid online because not only is the service as a whole much better, but they have loads and loads of online-centric games which actually use SERVERS. Nintendo has one online-centric game and it's P2P, which was the standard for online games like 15 years ago, and guess what, it was free. When servers started becoming the norm, that's when paid online started becoming the norm, so yes, I feel quite rightfully entitled.

(And yeah technically I didn't pay $300 on the console because I got it for free in a giveaway, but that isn't Nintendo's problem.)

And if you paid 300 for a console, you can still use that console. 

If you pay 60 for a game, then you can still use that game (unless it is online only, and that's not a Nintendo exclusive idea)

If you pay for your internet service, you can still use internet. 

But that doesn't entitle you to use Nintendo's online service, which was stated from the get-go would have a fee associated with it. 

It's almost like you don't understand how economics work. 

You don't get to buy the burger and just assume the french fries are free and get angry because you have to pay the combo price to get pop and chips to go with it. 

Sorry this is off topic, but are you from Cleveland or something. I'm from Cleveland and we say pop. Just had to ask. I know folks from Detroit that call it pop as well.

And if you paid 300 for a console, you can still use that console. 

If you pay 60 for a game, then you can still use that game (unless it is online only, and that's not a Nintendo exclusive idea)

If you pay for your internet service, you can still use internet. 

But that doesn't entitle you to use Nintendo's online service, which was stated from the get-go would have a fee associated with it. 

It's almost like you don't understand how economics work. 

You don't get to buy the burger and just assume the french fries are free and get angry because you have to pay the combo price to get pop and chips to go with it. 

No, that's a poor analogy, the cost of the game doesn't automatically cover online costs and holy shit why am I arguing? 

You are wrong. 

And this isn't just about Nintendo. WoW costs monthly to play online. Xbox One costs money to play online. Final Fantasy XIV costs money to play online. PS4 costs money to play online. Nintendo's online cost is a fraction of any of those fees and you're still whining. It has little to do with 'Nintendo' as a whole, but it sounds like you're raging against the idea of online play and Nintendo happens to be the bitch du jour so you're arguing your points while pretending it's somehow Nintendo exclusive to act like you're on topic. 

If you don't like paying for online, that's fine. I'm not too fond of it either, but online gaming is a luxury. If you don't wanna pay for it, play on PC. Based on the numbers and how much money PSN/XBL makes from as many sources as it does proves that the service is a value and that it's worth it to many. You and others just have entitlement issues.