It has online play (Call of Duty worked great--Mario Kart was plagued with disconnects), limited voice chat, and some leaderboards.  That's about it.  You can't send invites (d21lewis wants to play Ninja Gaiden...), you can't "prefer" people you play online, messages don't give any kind of notification to the receiver (d21lewis sent you a message: good game!), no unified Achievements/Trophies, video chat is only available outside of games, matchmaking is all over the place (noobs vs experts), no party chat, no gameplay sharing--I could write a laundry list comparing PS3/PS4/Xbox One/Xbox 360/Wii/Wii U/Vita/3DS. Nintendo just hasn't put forth any kind of effort to make their online good. 

The only problem I have right now about online is the lack of features and lack of games that use online. Honestly I want almost every Nintendo game to have an online mode .

Incorrect, PS+ is only required for online multiplayer of games that do not require online to function.

No wonder they don't charge, I wouldn't pay a cent for that. :/

What on earth are you talking about? Players hosting servers? You'd actually want to play on a server hosted by another player? You wouldn't feel like the host had an advantage over you? I've been serious PC gamer my whole life, and the last time I've played something hosted by another player was probably Rainbow 6 and Age of Empires over Zone when that existed.

When I play with my friends we usually rent our own server. And that's what you refer as a community server... If you think that this servers just pop out of sky for free, than why don't you pop one out? Last time I've checked 70 player server for BF4 is around 90$/month, so that's ~920$/year with 15% discount. So from my perspective 50$ a year on PS4 or One to play with your friends is not such a bad deal. 

Pls thats not even the same thing. Remotely. Paying online for the most part is optional, and there are diffrent PS+ tiers and prices. Don't know how that has anything to do with paying for an $800 console. what are you even talking about? Be rest assured, if they somehow tied the cost of a console to the online service and could go on to sell you a $1000 worth of hardware with a $200 down payment and then a monthly subscription people will probably buy into it.

Completely different thing from this though.

The people who say Nintendo's "free" online is good enough are the same ones who said dial-up was good enough for them when broadband started becoming widely available.

And people seem to forget that when you're gaming online on a console, you're utilizing a network infrastructure that Sony and M$ have built from the ground up and poured hundreds of millions of dollars into over the years. Monetizing their expensive to maintain online service was a smart move on M$'s part from day one and allowed them to expand and get a leg up on the competition. Sony finally saw the writing on the wall and was forced to follow suite for PSN, although they disguised theirs with a glorified game rental program.

The reason online gaming is "free" on PC in most cases is because it's decentralized compared to consoles, often left up to gamers to set up their own servers, and for major digital distribution platforms like Steam and Origin, they make enough dough from game sales and advertising to afford making most of the online components to their games free. (Funny how you always hear complaints about all the "advertising" on XBL and now PSN, but these same folks never complain about getting bombarded with ads whenever they load up Steam or Origin.)

There's far, far more to an online network and gaming service that the ability to join and play games online. The lack of unified account system, universal store, social functions (any AT ALL in-game), rewards system, and gameplay sharing all count against it (not to mention the non-interaction or gameplay perks of auto-download/install of updates/patches, etc). These things are the expectations with a new console as they're included by default by the competition. If Nintendo charged, maybe they'd be able to invest in a system that doesn't resemble what the PS2 had + Miiverse.

Holy shit the thread and comments remind me so much of Playstation fans early last gen.

OT: Last gen I thought paying for xbox live was totally fair at the beginning they offered a great service. A service way better than the competition (Sony). Later on in the gen Sony kept improving its network and the difference became negligible for me. That's when xbox live lost its value for me. The fact that Sony offered basically the same for free. Now that Sony charges for its service both xbox live and PSN are close in value for me. Sony has a slight edge since they offer superior games. Nintendo has lots to catch up in my opinion, but when they do and it stays free then their console will increase its value by a lot in my opinion.

I think Games with Gold and the Instant Game Collection do more than make up for the price :D