Rummy Posted August 19, 2015 Posted August 19, 2015 You are... They have little choice if they want to use NFC. It's that simple. Yes, backup will probably be useful down the road but this is barely even an issue right now. So, as I said, no I'm not. I'm not blaming them for using a lesser chip over a greater chip - I'm blaming them if they choose to use NFC in the first place at all knowing the limitations. If they then feel limited within that choice(they aren't, depending on what they want) and do not compensate enough for the limitations of it - you can't expect the consumer to carry that burden nor the burden of understanding, we aren't making the choices. For the record - you've referenced affordability and prices - are you able to actually tell me the varying costs of NFC chips and capabilities? I have no concept for the pricing. I'd even argue the higher price difference may well have been acceptable to a large number of consumers, considering the amount that amiibos sold for during their shortages.
Sheikah Posted August 19, 2015 Posted August 19, 2015 Come back to us when Arkham Knight DLC unlocks skins in Rocket League, Uncharted 4, Journey and extra features in another dozen unrelated games. Then complain about the poor value of amiibo. I'll complain right now and here's why. It's still just unlocking stuff already on those respective discs. All 'value' is perceived; it's not real! They've paywalled their content off and you think you're getting something extra, rather than just getting access to the content you really already own on that disc. It's a pretty lousy practice and it's remarkable how you seem to think it's good value rather than a subtle marketing ploy.
Serebii Posted August 19, 2015 Posted August 19, 2015 I'll complain right now and here's why. It's still just unlocking stuff already on those respective discs. All 'value' is perceived; it's not real! They've paywalled their content off and you think you're getting something extra, rather than just getting access to the content you really already own on that disc. It's a pretty lousy practice and it's remarkable how you seem to think it's good value rather than a subtle marketing ploy. All of the content they unlock is content that wouldn't exist if not for amiibo. Also, how else would you expect amiibo to unlock things if it isn't already programmed into the game? I want to see your thoughts here. How would you do it? You're all mouth going on about how bad it is, yet you don't propose a solution. Go on then, wow me. So, as I said, no I'm not. I'm not blaming them for using a lesser chip over a greater chip - I'm blaming them if they choose to use NFC in the first place at all knowing the limitations. If they then feel limited within that choice(they aren't, depending on what they want) and do not compensate enough for the limitations of it - you can't expect the consumer to carry that burden nor the burden of understanding, we aren't making the choices. For the record - you've referenced affordability and prices - are you able to actually tell me the varying costs of NFC chips and capabilities? I have no concept for the pricing. I'd even argue the higher price difference may well have been acceptable to a large number of consumers, considering the amount that amiibos sold for during their shortages. https://gototags.com/technology/nfc/nfc-chip-types/ It's also ridiculous to say "They should do it anyway because people paid more when amiibo were rare". That's ridiculous. Never mistake the vocal minority for the majority.
Sheikah Posted August 19, 2015 Posted August 19, 2015 (edited) All of the content they unlock is content that wouldn't exist if not for amiibo. How else would you expect amiibo to unlock things if it isn't already programmed into the game? I want to see your thoughts here. How would you do it? You're all mouth going on about how bad it is, yet you don't propose a solution. Go on then, wow me. Prepare to be wowed. That content would still exist. It was developed during the game's development phase. Therefore, I expect to receive all the content that was made during the game's development when I buy the game. And if they have devoted a staff member to making amiibo stuff rather than stuff that everyone can enjoy, then that's just as shitty a situation. They're taking staff away from making other features if that's the case, even if it's to make content that doesn't take too long to make. If they continue development after release then I would be fine with paying more, because they have done more work beyond the release of the game. To expect people to pay for a game then pay on top immediately upon release to get all content is just greed, and I think you'll find many people aren't happy about that. Then again, you know people don't like this practice, don't you? After a look at the amiiqo article on Eurogamer it seems you're frantically trying to put out the same fires, but getting negged to hell in the process. Edited August 19, 2015 by Sheikah
Serebii Posted August 19, 2015 Posted August 19, 2015 (edited) Prepare to be wowed. That content would still exist. It was developed during the game's development phase. Therefore, I expect to receive all the content that was made during the game's development when I buy the game. And if they have devoted a staff member to making amiibo stuff rather than stuff that everyone can enjoy, then that's just as shitty a situation. They're taking staff away from making other features if that's the case, even if it's to make content that doesn't take too long to make. If they continue development after release then I would be fine with paying more, because they have done more work beyond the release of the game. To expect people to pay for a game then pay on top immediately upon release to get all content is just greed, and I think you'll find many people aren't happy about that. Then again, you know people don't like this practice, don't you? After a look at the amiiqo article on Eurogamer it seems you're trying putting out the same fires, getting negged to hell in the process. Those people are as woefully misinformed as you and, once again, never mistake the vocal minority for the majority. For one, you honestly believe they'd have put Marth in Codename STEAM, Inkling outfits in Yoshi, Mario outfits in One Piece etc. without amiibo? You're sorely mistaken. I also explained yesterday how the majority of amiibo usage is not feasible without the amiibo too. Way to evade my question. Edited August 19, 2015 by Serebii
Sheikah Posted August 19, 2015 Posted August 19, 2015 Those people are as woefully misinformed as you and, once again, never mistake the vocal minority for the majority. For one, you honestly believe they'd have put Marth in Codename STEAM, Inkling outfits in Yoshi, Mario outfits in One Piece etc. without amiibo? You're sorely mistaken. I also explained yesterday how the majority of amiibo usage is not feasible without the amiibo too. Way to evade my question. And as I already said, even in cases where it seems likely they have devoted staff time to amiibo stuff rather than just paywalling already intended content, that effort and man hours could just have easily been put into adding stuff that everyone can enjoy. There is no defence for this practice. None at all.
Serebii Posted August 19, 2015 Posted August 19, 2015 (edited) And as I already said, even in cases where it seems likely they have devoted staff time to amiibo stuff rather than just paywalling already intended content, that effort and man hours could just have easily been put into adding stuff that everyone can enjoy. There is no defence for this practice. None at all. You're an idiot. I don't care if I get banned for saying it, but you're actually being a complete idiot right now. You're falsely implying that games are cut short, rushed and had content removed to add content for the games. That's completely untrue. Mod Note: This is not acceptable. Poster infracted and banned from the thread. If you cannot cope with an argument being made, attacking the person making it with name-calling is not the solution. Edited August 19, 2015 by Rummy Mod note.
Rummy Posted August 19, 2015 Posted August 19, 2015 https://gototags.com/technology/nfc/nfc-chip-types/ It's also ridiculous to say "They should do it anyway because people paid more when amiibo were rare". That's ridiculous. Never mistake the vocal minority for the majority. I already spoke to you about this before - why are you quoting something I haven't said as if I've said it? I'll need to research more on that link, and what Nintendo use, then consider the cost aspect. However a greater(and rhetorical, no need to actually argue this point) parallel to what I was originally saying would be; 'People':Omg 8gb(or even 32, lel) is too small for a console why don't they have more like 500GB or something! You: Because that's really expensive for flash memory and people just don't understand that. It's not Nintendo's fault. Me: Then why use flash memory in the first place, because that's kinda Nintendo's choice and thereby their fault. My issue is them choosing a tech knowing they'd be limited, be that by cost, ability, combination etc. and it apparently being expected for the consumer to understand and take responsibility for these limitations. Amiibo+NFC is a bit unique in that it's something new and not industry standard/expected, whereas things like storage, media, online capabilities etc are more expected as it is. However if pioneering some new idea - try to make it something you've got the resources to support the scope of. Has applied to Amiibo on more than just the NFC front, too.
Sheikah Posted August 19, 2015 Posted August 19, 2015 You're an idiot. I don't care if I get banned for saying it, but you're actually being a complete idiot right now. You're falsely implying that games are cut short, rushed and had content removed to add content for the games. That's completely untrue. Yaaay Nintendo boards. Where'd you even get that from anyway? I clearly just said that they put staff to task making amiibo content in cases where they're not just paywalling, when they could be making content for everyone. Not that they rush their games.
Rummy Posted August 19, 2015 Posted August 19, 2015 You're an idiot. I don't care if I get banned for saying it, but you're actually being a complete idiot right now. You're falsely implying that games are cut short, rushed and had content removed to add content for the games. That's completely untrue. Wow. Yeah. That's totally not on at all. Ongoing discussions aside - that's completely unnecessary.
somme Posted August 19, 2015 Posted August 19, 2015 I'd still rather pay a few quid for Rocket League skins than over a tenner for a hunk of plastic. I'd rather pay a couple of quid for the Nintendo DLC but they won't let me. Well, to be honest I'm not that bothered as I recently sold most of my WiiU games, but y'know, the option would've be nice.
Pestneb Posted August 19, 2015 Posted August 19, 2015 And as I already said, even in cases where it seems likely they have devoted staff time to amiibo stuff rather than just paywalling already intended content, that effort and man hours could just have easily been put into adding stuff that everyone can enjoy. There is no defence for this practice. None at all. Amiibo are a product in themselves. I would say cases where they have devoted staff time to amiibo stuff is the only time I really see the amiibo content being justified. The price paid for the amiibo pays for the content, not the price paid for the game itself. When the price paid by the consumer for the game is paying for the content, I think it is morally incorrect to lock that content behind a further purchase. Your statement about everyone enjoying... is a bit bizarre to me. 1) Not everyone can enjoy for example mariokart 8 because not everyone owns it. 2) If you allow ability to purchase in the "can" statement, then by extension everyone CAN enjoy amiibo stuff, they just need to purchase the appropriate amiibo/s. I see stock issues as being separate in this argument as imo it is to do with the delivery rather than the mechanism.
Daft Posted August 19, 2015 Posted August 19, 2015 It's a complicated matter really because it's quite convoluted. Personally, the fragmentation of DLC irks me (which I mentioned before). That there aren't other options to access the DLC is frustrating. I can appreciate both sides of it, though. I actually like the idea of Amiibos. I like collecting stuff. It's actually really cool that it unlocks items across games. I guess the main frustration comes when there is a disjoint; I don't want to buy 10+ figures but I don't want to be punished for that. Now obviously you aren't getting punished for not having the figure, but it's hard not to feel that way when it comes to unlocks that are more than just aesthetic. I think if it's just aesthetic items, that would be better. All the alternate costumes are cool. I think when it starts creeping into game modes and features, that is a problem. But that's just my two pence.
Sheikah Posted August 19, 2015 Posted August 19, 2015 (edited) @Pestneb Perhaps I could have been clearer. Let's use Splatoon as an example - the extra modes they added came as the result of some of the development team spending hours making that content. Even if you argue that the content was only made to give amiibos value (ie. it wasn't going to be there originally, which is tough to guess anyway) they still assign their time and effort to making exclusive stuff, rather than those guys making stuff that everyone can play. By everyone, I don't mean every person who owns the console, but every person who owns that game (amiibo owner or not). Factor in that the game was unfinished on release and it's a tough pill to swallow. Edited August 19, 2015 by Sheikah
Pestneb Posted August 19, 2015 Posted August 19, 2015 (edited) @Pestneb Perhaps I could have been clearer. Let's use Splatoon as an example - the extra modes they added came as the result of some of the development team spending hours making that content. Even if you argue that the content was only made to give amiibos value (ie. it wasn't going to be there originally, which is tough to guess anyway) they still assign their time and effort to making exclusive stuff, rather than those guys making stuff that everyone can play. By everyone, I don't mean every person who owns the console, but every person who owns that game (amiibo owner or not). Factor in that the game was unfinished on release and it's a tough pill to swallow. Splatoon I think goes too far... extra modes I want, the figurines... not so much. I would say that is unjustified content. When I bought splatoon I went for the amiiboless version, the amiibo version was reasonably priced initially, but I figured it would be small features I could live without. Having found the single player so lacking I now would quite like the amiibo missions... but they aren't worth £30, considering I paid less than that for the entire game. The amiibo themselves don't really appeal to me either, so the figurine element doesn't work for me, I would maybe pay £1 for all 3 figurines on a good day. In smash, essentially the amiibo are CPU characters. In MK8 and Yoshi's woolly world it's basically aesthetic costumes, in toad it is a fairly lazy treasure hunt, in hyrule it is little trinkets you could earn in game. These little things are small and easily dismissed, they add a little value to the figurines without really cheating game owners out of content and I like that. I agree, in splatoon there is fairly substantial content that seems to be locked behind an amiibo, and that doesn't sit well. Edited August 19, 2015 by Pestneb
Rummy Posted August 19, 2015 Posted August 19, 2015 Splatoon I think goes too far... extra modes I want, the figurines... not so much. I would say that is unjustified content imo I hear ya on that. Definitely want the content without the figures. I only own two other amiibos - a Tink and a Mario(which I didn't pay for). I got them/Tink mostly for the Smash functionality, rather than the figures themselves. I guess I kind of like the idea in Smash, especially given the heritage in it of trophies anyway, so having it as an Amiibo figure there feels a bit more suited than a bit of DLC or a card. Would I still have gotten a card with the same functionality for quid or two though? Probably yes - and I'm reluctant to even buy the DLC characters! I have however given two people Amiibo as presents, one of whom doesn't own a WiiU or N3DS at all, and one who has a WiiU+smash.
Pestneb Posted August 19, 2015 Posted August 19, 2015 well I have twice attempted to purchase the fox amiibo, using flubit and both times the post man "lost" it:blank: so I guess fate just doesn't want me to have a fox amiibo. maybe there'll be a fox et al. bundle with the new starfox game?
Hero-of-Time Posted August 19, 2015 Author Posted August 19, 2015 well I have twice attempted to purchase the fox amiibo, using flubit and both times the post man "lost" it:blank: so I guess fate just doesn't want me to have a fox amiibo. maybe there'll be a fox et al. bundle with the new starfox game? Wouldn't surprise me. Did Nintendo UK store ever have the next wave ( ROB, Duck Hunt etc. ) up for preorder?
Cube Posted August 19, 2015 Posted August 19, 2015 Wouldn't surprise me. Did Nintendo UK store ever have the next wave ( ROB, Duck Hunt etc. ) up for preorder? The UK store seems to only put them up pretty close to release.
Hero-of-Time Posted August 19, 2015 Author Posted August 19, 2015 The UK store seems to only put them up pretty close to release. For some reason I thought they were out next week. I'm a month ahead of myself.
markderoos Posted August 19, 2015 Posted August 19, 2015 the extra modes they added came as the result of some of the development team spending hours making that content. Even if you argue that the content was only made to give amiibos value (ie. it wasn't going to be there originally, which is tough to guess anyway) they still assign their time and effort to making exclusive stuff, rather than those guys making stuff that everyone can play. Don't forget that the development staff working on amiibo functionality are (partially) funded by amiibo generated income. If there was no income generated by amiibo, chances are these functionalities wouldn't even be considered at all. The argument that the same staff would've in stead been able to use their time adding free/extra game value all sounds nice but is hardly a sound business strategy. The games would either become more expensive or generate less profit because of higher staff costs. Or do you think adding the amiibo content as a "free extra for everyone" will generate so many extra games sold? I personaly don't think it would be the case as it's hardly comprehensive enough. (But I agree on Splatoon amiibo content, that was a bad decision).
Sheikah Posted August 19, 2015 Posted August 19, 2015 Well, we don't know that they are creating extra content. It could very easily be seen in many cases that they are ringfencing content that was already planned or made. On that one, we'll never actually know. The second thing is that although they might get some of that amiibo money to support their staff implementing these things, it's still time spent by the developers of the game making those kinds of features just for the people who shell out more. Either they're pushing the release date forward in order to add "extra" exclusive content, or sacrificing time that could be spent making features for everyone (in the case where they keep the same release date). More than anything though, it's the idea that getting all release content on day 1 will be full price + £10 * number of game-specific amiibo that particularly irks me. People that think I'm hating on amiibo, rest assured that any kind of D1 extra content annoys me. Especially in-game preorder bonuses.
Pestneb Posted August 19, 2015 Posted August 19, 2015 In most of the cases though I look at it as amiibo content being tied to the amiibo. With splatoon it feels more like the game is £50-£60, or you can buy the basic version without amiibo... But generally.. I am buying amiibo characters I like (with B listers being suggested along with A listers as gift suggestions, because I am kinda tough to buy gifts for!) So I see it as a case of I like this character, I can have a little hat with a design inspired by/based on them. I can have a little hunt for the image of them on this level. I can have a personalised cpu character of them. I get a little bonus (of very little value) for scanning them in... possibly the weakest use, but it adds a little value AND for Nintendo means I interact with these characters regularly. I don't feel upset that there are a bunch of MK8 costumes I will never have access too... because frankly I wouldn't use them in any case. So far the only amiibo use I've felt went a bit too far was splatoon amiibo. I think card packs wouldn't be a terrible plan for splatoon... each pack has a guaranteed 1 squid boy/squid/squid girl card with it's own set of custom card only gear. The other cards in the pack will carry codes for specific card gear (maybe even introduce new gear abilities on these cards). I know it would still be expensive, but you could swap cards with friends etc. Could even have a splatoon card trade go on with fellow n-e'ers :P
Ronnie Posted August 21, 2015 Posted August 21, 2015 In most of the cases though I look at it as amiibo content being tied to the amiibo. With splatoon it feels more like the game is £50-£60, or you can buy the basic version without amiibo... £20-30 for the same single player missions just with a different weapon? I think it makes more sense to consider the game to be £30 and the amiibo's unlocking minor challenge missions.
Recommended Posts