They decided that what the game really needs is servers to manage all the connections instead of going P2P like every other fighting game. So now the servers get overloaded which means the matchmaking doesn't work and lobbies become unplayable/unjoinable. Also they decided the best thing to do when the servers go down in every case (including when you are playing offline modes) is to kick you back to the main menu immediately.
Which is pretty

when it happens. Like, they can't do Magic: Duels of the Planeswalkers and go "WE CAN'T CONNECT TO THE SERVER, RETRY!?" at the end of your rounds/fight money to accumulate?
This article touches on what I've said before about today's game players care more about quantity and checklist shit than actual games.
http://www.gamesradar.com/street-fighter-5-backlash-proves-we-value-quantity-over-quality/?tag=grsocial-20
Like Morma said: That article is shit. You just think that article is good because it confirms your bias toward "but who cares about single-player tho!?"
Multiple games prove it. Look at Star Wars Battlefield.
http://swbstats.com/PC: 3,547 (24h peak: 7,036)
XBOXONE: 32,867 (24h peak: 33,858)
PS4: 48,301 (24h peak: 54,930)
Total: 84,715
Yes, let's look at Star Wars: Battlefront. A game that has nose-diving PC playerbase within two weeks of launch because people told DICE flatout "there's nothing here that makes me want to replay it" during the OPEN beta within two weeks of launch and they haven't fixed it.
Consoles are only playing it because they have no other shooters.
For comparison sake:
http://bfhstats.com/Currently online players (Total: 20,471):
PC
958
Peak 24h
2,258
PS3
2,775
Peak 24h
3,409
XBOX360
1,472
Peak 24h
1,667
XBOXONE
7,018
Peak 24h
7,774
PS4
8,248
Peak 24h
10,838
and
http://bf4stats.com/Currently online players (Total: 94,127):
PC
15,401
Peak 24h
30,159
PS3
18,290
Peak 24h
21,066
XBOX360
8,709
Peak 24h
9,037
XBOXONE
20,457
Peak 24h
20,982
PS4
31,270
Peak 24h
39,636
More people are playing a near 3 year old title than the two shooters that came after it.
Why do you think that is?Just for shits and giggles:
http://bf3stats.com/Global stats
PC online2 878
PS3 online4 836
360 online2 324
Hardline has
less players than BF3 and Battlefront is nearly
on par with BF3's player count on PC. Consoles for last gen are nearly the same. Battlefront nearly edges out
just barely on next-gen/this gen consoles of PS4/X-box. Why?
Because there is barely anything there to play.
If consoles had numerous other shooters like CS:GO, Rainbow Six: Siege (okay this one IS on consoles), and the like? I doubt Battlefront would be holding as many players as it does right now.
Titanfall got the same amount of shit of "lacks content/maps" as Battlefront, and you know what happened on PC?
Yep, the community died within two months while Respawn tried to get new maps out. Except nobody but like 400 people continued to play it at that point. And then Respawn tried to add co-op and still nobody came back.
So, to use Battlefront as a defense for SF5 coming from someone that plays predominately shooters:

Please, dig harder, dear.