Explosion of positive press for the Wii U

[Sheikah]

Please explain this to me. For so long the biggest draw for online in the PS3 was the fact that it was free (considering their main competition was Xbox Live), but ever since the PS4 was announced as having a subscription as well, I've only seen fans say...well, the thing I'm quoting.

 

It just came as very hypocritical for me. This is a question I'm asking out of honest curiosity, since I rarely touch a PS3 (much less the 4): what makes PS Plus worth the price of subscription when compared to its previously free iteration?

 

The problem was that Clownferret was describing it as £40 to play online, which was a bit of a biased view, when it's actually £40 to play online plus loads of games included, many of which are actually really good and you definitely get your money's worth.

 

I'm not saying that forced pay for online is a good thing (it isn't). What I am saying that Clown is wrong to do a straight comparison between Wii U and PS4 online, because you're actually getting quite a bit more than just online for the £40.

 

I would bet every pound I had that if Plus for Nintendo existed, where you got the same value of Nintendo games included, that fans on here would be praising it like nothing you have ever heard.

 

To answer what justifies it - nothing does, in terms of why it suddenly costs money to play online. What I can say though that the Wii U and PS4 online comparison is not clear cut.

Edited November 26, 2013 by Sheikah

[Ashley]

To be fair the XBOne has even managed to screwup that feature. Next gen indeed.

 

Its better to have tried and failed then to have never tried at all

 

Please explain this to me. For so long the biggest draw for online in the PS3 was the fact that it was free (considering their main competition was Xbox Live), but ever since the PS4 was announced as having a subscription as well, I've only seen fans say...well, the thing I'm quoting.

 

It just came as very hypocritical for me. This is a question I'm asking out of honest curiosity, since I rarely touch a PS3 (much less the 4): what makes PS Plus worth the price of subscription when compared to its previously free iteration?

 

Personally I popped down £40 and could quite easily not have to buy a game for 15 months (got the 3 months free deal going a while back). Every month there's about a half dozen games (some extend multiple months) for free, as well as other bits and pieces (DLC, avatars, themes, 10% off downloads).

 

Would it be better if the PS4 online play was still free? Of course. But the main difference here is MS said on the off "give us money for online" and then eventually tried to sweeten the deal a bit. Sony gave a sweet deal, and then started charging for it. Different business tactics, one seems less...cruel. But its interpretation at the end of the day.

 

 

Speaking of, I don't understand why Nintendo don't do similar. They have a huge back catalogue of beloved titles. £5 month/£40 a year and offer a dozen games (ranging from NES to Cube) a month as a free download that, like Plus, you keep while you're a member. I'd pay £40 for Beetle Adventure Racing right now

Edited November 26, 2013 by Ashley

[Hero-of-Time]

...You're not answering the question. "It's good because I already have it" can't be the reason.

 

It can and it is.

[f00had]

Do you really need to ask why getting 4 games every month for a whole year at only £40 is bad?

 

I just wish Nintendo had a deal like Sony's where any virtual console games you buy can be used on all your systems. I can share PS1 games between my Vita and PS3 I'd love to do the same with my Wii U and 3DS.

 

I wonder how long this good press will last? Sooner or later PS4 and Xbox 1 will start releasing new and exciting games as for Wii U all we have to look forward to are Mario Kart and Smash Bros.

[Jonnas]

Do you really need to ask why getting 4 games every month for a whole year at only £40 is bad?

 

Yes, considering I was more asking what it was, than why.

[Serebii]

Please explain this to me. For so long the biggest draw for online in the PS3 was the fact that it was free (considering their main competition was Xbox Live), but ever since the PS4 was announced as having a subscription as well, I've only seen fans say...well, the thing I'm quoting.

 

It just came as very hypocritical for me. This is a question I'm asking out of honest curiosity, since I rarely touch a PS3 (much less the 4): what makes PS Plus worth the price of subscription when compared to its previously free iteration?

It's because they wing in several free games with it

[Retro_Link]

The PAL column on the right shows all the free games Sony have given away to Europe in Plus over the years, it's quite incredible... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instant_Game_Collection

 

Would go crazy for something similar from Nintendo!!

Edited November 26, 2013 by Retro_Link

[Phube]

Are they to keep, forever? Because that's a seriously impressive list!

[Sheikah]

Are they to keep, forever? Because that's a seriously impressive list!

 

You can download/play your games so long as you have your Plus subscription active. If you don't renew your subscription you can still renew it in the future at any time and get access back to all games you've downloaded before. It's brill.

[Phube]

Ahhh... so it's like Love Film for games...

[Zechs Merquise]

Another positive Wii U thread derailed... niiiice.

 

PS+ Is obviously very good value for money. The list of games you can get from it are worth far more than the subscription and as such it's far better value than Live - by a long way.

 

However it still puts online gaming behind a pay wall, so for the gamer that just buys a handful of retail games over the life of the console and wants to COD or FIFA online a couple of times a month it's probably an unwanted cost.

 

However for those who live for gaming, it can literally provide dozens of free quality titles, and when you're talking about games like Far Cry 2, Bullet Storm and Deus Ex Human Revolution for FREE, it's a no brainer.

 

However back to the point of this thread, it's great that the press have started praising Nintendo. Just a shame that you can't have a discussion about that without it getting totally derailed.

[Lens of Truth]

It's just a matter of media outlets needing something new to talk about now that the PS4 and Xbone are out (notice how they're only interested in talking about SM3DW; ignoring the rest of its library - that's cause it's shiny, new and a currently hot commodity).

Yet at the same time there's the Wii U which got largely pushed into the background and has much lower specs, yet the Wii U is the console with the gaming gold. SM3DW, Pikmin 3, NSMBU - even titles like Wii Fit U are coming out to greater critical acclaim than the 'next gen' launch titles.

 

I think it's times like this when people realise the worth of Nintendo.

 

The Wii U becoming the known as "the little console that could" amidst all the sound and fury of the new console launches is somewhat heart-warming and I think Zechs summed up the reasons why, but I can't help feeling uneasy about the blatant media group-think. Or is it just that I'm so used to it in its opposite form that when it turns positive I get creeped out? Luckily that hasn't affected our own dear forum

[Agent Gibbs]

There is no OS level party chat function anymore, or even a standard VOIP API provided by MS for developers to slot into their game. Instead, developers have to code their own VOIP solution per-game and it only works within the game itself (so no cross game chat), just like on PS3, 3DS and Wii U.

 

 

 

The Xbox One is the console of balance afterall

 

 

 

 

Its bloody brilliant to see all the positive news around nintendo, and as others have mentioned its probably due to disapointing laucnh lineups on the PS4/Xbone, in that respect they are very similar to the WiiU, they've all launched to be the next gen and been amazing consoles with brillinat technical aspects......but then not followed it up with software (before anyone starts) exclussively on them.

 

Third party games on them are an anomoly, they look a little better and play at a better frame rate......but they look amazing on the PS3/360 as it is so they hardly justify £400 for a new console thats not backwards compatible in anyway...

 

So obviously the media has reevaluted their view of the WiiU, the PS4/Xbone have joined the smae boat, but the WiiU has had a year to get a good software line up and right now if people have money for a new console the WiiU is the best value for money, and probably will be till Q3/Q4 of 2014

 

So roll on the good times, we might get a decent install base, and at worst become people's second console....

 

I wonder how will this affect developer attitudes if the media has switched, and if as a result userbase increase.....oh how i'd love a grovelling EA with its tail between its legs to come back (purely for ME)

[Retro_Link]

However back to the point of this thread, it's great that the press have started praising Nintendo.

Well that's really all there is to say on the matter no? until we get more example.

 

I don't really understand the comparison however; 1 year of and upcoming Wii U games being compared to PS4/Xbone launch titles?... If the Wii U wasn't the best value for money/didn't have the best library/line-up then damn!

Edited November 27, 2013 by Retro_Link

[Zechs Merquise]

Well that's really all there is to say on the matter no? until we get more example.

 

I don't really understand the comparison however; 1 year of and upcoming Wii U games being compared to PS4/Xbone launch titles?... If the Wii U didn't have the best library/line-up by now then damn!

 

The comparison is due to the press at the time of the Wii U's release spewing forth that the Wii U had a library of games that were already available elsewhere and lacked the killer exclusives that have been associated with Nintendo launches of the past.

 

However since the release of the PS4 and the XBO people have seen that maybe they were slightly harsh on the Wii U. The PS4 and XBO haven't produced anything that truly justifies a new console and the exclusives have been sub-par.

 

I also think there's a degree of disappointment from some quarters that the XBO and PS4 are offering last gen in higher resolution - at least the Wii U tried to do something different.

 

Believe me, there are some spectacular things that could be done with the new hardware, but I feel whilst the focus is so aimed at higher graphical fidelity new gameplay experiences will suffer as a result.

 

For example, imagine KZ4 but set in a WW1 trench warfare environment. Thousands of troops charging enemy lines and the feeling of being involved in a truly epic clash. However to do so would mean that the world and its inhabitants would look far closer to what we've seen on the 360 and PS4. Instead we get the graphically superb KZ4, but it's essentially nothing we haven't seen before - a very pretty corridor shooter.

[Jonnas]

Third party games on them are an anomoly, they look a little better and play at a better frame rate......but they look amazing on the PS3/360 as it is so they hardly justify £400 for a new console thats not backwards compatible in anyway...

 

This is the sort of thing that really should've been obvious from the start, really, but consumers actually had to see for themselves just how meaningless the leap from PS3 to PS4 is (in terms of raw visuals, I mean).

 

Really, what we're seeing with the Wii U is no different than what happened with the Xbox 360 (oh, that first year was hilarious). It doesn't make an impact at first, but by being a slow burner, it will find good success.

[Clownferret]

let's hope all the buzz will turn things around for Wii U. Next year the big guns are all coming to town, but I really fear that Watchdogs won't happen and we have seen the last of all the AAA 3rd party releases.

 

As a 42 year old who has played consoles as far back as the Binatone, the Wii U is in my top 3 consoles of all time and I just can't get my head round how 100 million Wii owners have not jumped on board.

[Serebii]

let's hope all the buzz will turn things around for Wii U. Next year the big guns are all coming to town, but I really fear that Watchdogs won't happen and we have seen the last of all the AAA 3rd party releases.

 

As a 42 year old who has played consoles as far back as the Binatone, the Wii U is in my top 3 consoles of all time and I just can't get my head round how 100 million Wii owners have not jumped on board.

I agree. I seriously don't get why people aren't jumping on. Sure, it's not perfect, but the games are second to none and it's a fantastic console

[Sheikah]

I think it basically comes down to 'most people don't agree with you'