Ronnie

That wasn't the argument. Sheikah mentioned a lack of perks for signing up. I said Nintendo will be giving us some perks, as they've mentioned they would be. Simple. Erm, I never said you did? I'm talking about Nintendo's messaging. Nothing to do with me. Does their messaging need to be very clear in the run up to the service launching? Absolutely, we'll see if it ends up being... No idea. One person who may or may not be invested in the Switch ecosystem not knowing doesn't automatically mean their messaging isn't clear. Pretty much any time online has cropped up there's been a disclaimer saying free until such and such. I'm sure that'll increase as we get closer to September You're putting words in my mouth again. I asked if he'd heard of PSN or Xbox Live as the concept of paying for online seemed crazy to him. Capitals. Thank you very much for the condescending tone. God forbid Nintendo doesn't go with the usual approach. Not like they've based their entire history on doing just that. I've already said it's a problem their paid online isn't up and running on day one but how big a problem is it really to give their customers a year and a half of online for free. Come on. You're just looking for faults now. If Playstation 5 gave their users free online for that long people would be pleased. You sound like all those detractors twelve months ago. Detractors who had said complaints evaporate away when they first held the thing. It's the fasting selling console in US history, I think you're overstating the problem and just looking for arguments now. Because whether it's 12 quid, 15 quid or 17 quid the point is the same. Next time you present any estimations will you be posting a disclaimer each time? Nope. If you'd read the whole thread before launching into all these arguments you'd have seen i quoted the updated £17 price tag as well.

It's not a free service that's suddenly being charged for. It's a charged for service with a free trial, they've said this multiple times since January 2017. It's not ideal but it's not what you're quoting. Has he never heard of a PS3/360/PS4/XBO or a free trial then? I only ask because charging for online seems so alien to him. I estimated based on conversion rates. I later estimated via the up to date Australia prices, which you didn't quote: That's all we have to go on at the moment.

It's not as if it's a slog to support Nintendo, you support them and get fantastic games to sink dozens if not hundreds of hours into? I get that businesses like to reward their customers and their My Nintendo rewards are pretty shit overall, but for me personally I had a Wii U for four years and I had a great time with it. I don't feel Nintendo owe me anything. Unlike, say, when they dropped the 3DS price so quickly and had to do the Ambassador program. I just don't think anything has approached that sort of shafting their consumers since.

Nintendo charging £17 a year for online (with added extras like VC games) after offering it for free for a year isn't "industry bullshit".

When it's justified, like it is in Battlefront 2's case, absolutely. When it's justified and manifests itself by way of death threats, twitter abuse to Mass Effect Andromeda animators or heckling hosts and destroying property at Pokemon Go meets, as a few of many, many examples, no it isn't one of the better things to come from the community. A community that is shown to be extremely immature at times. And in this case when it's demanding Nintendo give us games and other freebies as "the least they can do" for giving us free online for a year, then no, it absolutely isn't either.

It's this obsession the gaming community seems to have with complaining or crusading against everything that really winds me up. Charging for online and giving games back in return has become an industry standard. Products cost money to make/maintain, businesses charge for them. What's pro-consumer is keeping video games the same price or cheaper than they ever have been. If they want to charge me a quid or two a month to run their online servers, fine by me.

Sorry, what? Compensate them for what exactly? "That's the least they could do"?? They've said from day 1, January last year, before the Switch even launched that gamers will get a free trial of their online subscription service before it moved to a paid system later that year. They then extended that free trial by many months. What do we need compensating for exactly?

Anti-consumer? There's that sense of entitlement again. Everything needs to be free, just because. Online infrastructure costs money, most seem to agree that charging for it is fair enough if there's added incentives to do so, which there will be. They are giving us something cool. That's why they've delayed the launch of paid-for online, to get that something cool be as cool as possible. Anyway, until we have more information, we're just going in circles. Maybe they will make MK8/Splatoon/PuyoPuyo Tetris and all the other online games free forever, but they'll have a tough time writing them all in the small print as exemptions going forward. They're in a relatively tough spot, I think we can all agree on that.

All I said was plenty of people on here seem to think Nintendo charging for everything rather than picking and choosing is probably the best way of doing things. I haven't needed to justify anything because others have already done it, or at least explained their reasoning: Yes, from a purely selfish pov of course all consumers would rather have something for free than be charged for it, but I (and I suspect others) are trying to look at it from an objective POV and the fine line Nintendo have to walk between being consumer friendly but also operating as a business.

Look I've already said I'd obviously prefer for Nintendo's online to be free forever. My point was, if they have to charge us, then it makes more sense to apply it to every game, rather than pick and choose. People have mentioned the added perks Nintendo will be giving us, you just keep ignoring them. We also don't know exactly what their virtual console like system will be, so it's pointless assessing the value before we know all the details. To me, paying a quid or so a month for online and virtual console is a good deal. They're a business. The are 10x more anti-consumer gaming companies out there. Don't look at it like paywalling old content. They've been very clear that MK8 online will be free for a limited time. Not the other way around. Games are 10x more expensive to make, and are being sold for less than they ever have. If you'd rather companies started selling every game for £70 and ditched DLC, microtransactions, season passes and paid-for online, then that's your call, but I suspect not many would agree with you. As I said, Nintendo have spent the past twelve months messaging that MK8 and other online games will be free for a limited time only. If they'd suddenly out of the blue decided to tell people they have to start paying for it, of course get upset, but they haven't. It was messaged from the very beginning.

I thought it was obvious I meant people think Nintendo charging for every game is a better idea, rather than picking and choosing and muddying the message. Obviously I would prefer for online to be free forever, but I'm happy to pay £12 a year for it, in Nintendo's case at least. Online costs them (and Sony and Microsoft) money and given that video games themselves have never been cheaper, yet cost a ton to make, I don't see a problem with them trying to make a few extra quid to pay for the increased dev and infrastructure costs. Entitlement is one of my biggest gripes with the gaming community. The notion that gamers seem to think they deserve everything for nothing. I'm sure Nintendo will come up with enough added incentives to sign up, playing Super Mario Kart online with friends for instance.

Most on here think that charging for previously released games is a good idea. I know their statement on the Mario Kart 8 page (similar is on the Splatoon one) was vague enough for them to change their mind at a later date. My point was in reply to the above quote, they've suggested that no longer being able to play a game once paid online starts, might be the case, in which case it isn't going to come out of the blue.

They've already mentioned that's what's going to happen.

You're getting virtual console games, Nintendo have said they're working on making the perks add value and that's one of them.

Those who are still playing Splatoon 2 and MK8 a year later are probably hardcore enough to shell out £14 or whatever it is a year, especially if Nintendo are offering extra perks like VC games on top of that.

Great news !!! Surprising, but great

Wow. I genuinely had a couple of oh my god moments a couple of times watching the Variety kit video. Definitely doesn't look like there'll be an issue with depth or replayability. Some of the ideas in there are genius. - Cut a piece of paper into the shape of a fish and scan it into the fishing game - Use the joy-con camera to scan objects and build a stadium in the motorbike game - Make a custom circuit by moving/steering the joy-con around - Rhythm cards and the whole cut out a wave worm from paper and make your own sounds in the piano The recording studio is also a great idea for the piano, YouTube will be full of people's creations. They've seriously thought all this through

Is Owlboy a Metroidvania/platformer kind of game? I haven't really seen much of it

Those look fantastic tbf

Firstly, Starfox Assault is awesome, and at the very least better than a lot of Nintendo developed Star Fox games. But more importantly, Bamco are developing this "in collaboration with Nintendo" so hopefully it'll turn out well.

Good stuff. Obviously their way of incentivising people to go digital.

That's a big worry for sure and just to clarify my earlier post about waiting for a discount, 95% of the indie games on my Switch I bought at full price, so far and will likely continue to do so. More often than not (ahem, Cave Story) the games are absolutely worth the full price and so the devs deserve that much at least. Oxenfree I had almost zero intention of ever playing it, but at a few quid, they made an extra sale. Same with Night in the Woods, I just don't think I'll enjoy the gameplay enough to buy it full price. I get your wider more long term concerns though, hopefully it's not a slippery slope. I hear a lot of "I'll wait for it to come out on PS+" comments from people.

Yeah I'm waiting for a sale on that one, I like the art style but gameplay wise I'm not convinced....

I wouldn't have picked up Oxenfree if it weren't for that 75% sale. Wondering if other indie devs will see the success it's brought them and do likewise.

I almost wished I hadn't done the post-game chapter last night after finishing the game, sort of soured the experience at the time, but I have to applaud the level design of it, very clever. The visuals were a mixed bag for me, majority of times they were lovely (incl. the UI, character designs, animations etc) but at the same time there were a couple of very ugly levels.