Hero-of-Time Posted April 10, 2016 Posted April 10, 2016 NOTE: This isn't a discussion about whether it will or won't happen, rather what changes would they need to implement for you to splash the cash. This topic popped up on Gaf the other day and thought it would be interesting to see what people on here thought. It can't have gone unnoticed by Nintendo that both Sony and Microsoft are charging for their services and people are more than willing to pay the price for said services. There is money to be made with this approach and at the moment it's being left on the table. If Nintendo were to go ahead with charging for online, what would they need to do to get you to subscribe/pay? Personally, I have no issue with paying for online gaming. I have done every year since the launch of the 360 and continue to do so with the PS4. My issue with Nintendo doing this kind of service is that it would have to offer the same as what the other two console makers are providing. Things like party chat and monthly games to download would have to be on the cards. While I know Nintendo only gamers are used to playing online for free, what about a tier system for the service? You can still playing online for free but you wouldn't have access to the monthly games, things like YouTube/Twitch streaming capabilities or party chat. Thoughts?
Dcubed Posted April 10, 2016 Posted April 10, 2016 Nope. Online play is an occasional thing for me, wouldn't use it enough to justify the cost. And I have no interest in a PS Plus/Games with Gold ripoff because I want to outright own my games, not rent them.
tapedeck Posted April 10, 2016 Posted April 10, 2016 Nope. Refuse to on PS4 so would prefer Nintendo to continue as they are. In my opinion they need as many aces up their sleeve as possible and this is a quick win against their competition. Although they could offer additional purchases like party chat/discounted VC games aka PS+pricing and it wouldn't impact everyone too much. I think giving the consumer choice is important here. Like some games should be free to play online after a set amount of months. Let the developer decide.
Hero-of-Time Posted April 10, 2016 Author Posted April 10, 2016 Nope. Refuse to on PS4 so would prefer Nintendo to continue as they are.they need as many aces up their sleeves as possible. (Although they could offer additional purchases like party chat/discounted VC games aka PS+pricing and it wouldn't impact everyone too much). I think giving the consumer choice is important here. Like some games should be free to play online after a set amount of months. Let the developer decide. I think the choice option, like you and I suggested, would work best. It gives Nintendo and the consumer some wiggle room and allows the end user to customise their experience. I just can't see Nintendo matching certain features without having to charge for them.
Josh64 Posted April 10, 2016 Posted April 10, 2016 When I was really into my 360 I was more than happy to. I don't care for party chat but they would NEED a decent messaging service, one that sends actual notifications to the other player. Game invites too, trying to set up a game on Wii U is a nightmare. They'd also just need to up their online choice in general - Mario Party, Nintendo Land, MAS Olympics and starfox should have all had online options for example. As far as free games are concerned, I'd be happy with a couple of free VC games a month.
Glen-i Posted April 10, 2016 Posted April 10, 2016 Nope, absolutely not. I don't even have online access where I live, so it'd be an utter waste of money for me.
Ashley Posted April 10, 2016 Posted April 10, 2016 If they did some kind of Netflix-like service with their back catalogue I'd be up for it. Anything akin to their current offering and I wouldn't.
Blade Posted April 10, 2016 Posted April 10, 2016 For a price of a game (£40, lets say) similar to plus then I don't see the problem on the proviso that they at least offer what the competition offers in features such as party chat etc.
Hero-of-Time Posted April 10, 2016 Author Posted April 10, 2016 If they did some kind of Netflix-like service with their back catalogue I'd be up for it. Anything akin to their current offering and I wouldn't. Out of all the console makers I think they are the only ones to be able to offer such a service without needing 3rd parties to chip in. Having a rental service for their NES, SNES, N64, GameCube and Wii first party software would be an amazing thing for a lot of people. I personally prefer to own software rather than renting but, again, it's another choice for the customer, which is only a good thing.
Ashley Posted April 10, 2016 Posted April 10, 2016 Out of all the console makers I think they are the only ones to be able to offer such a service without needing 3rd parties to chip in. Having a rental service for their NES, SNES, N64, GameCube and Wii first party software would be an amazing thing for a lot of people. I personally prefer to own software rather than renting but, again, it's another choice for the customer, which is only a good thing. Personally I can't be sodded keeping hold of old consoles and games so it would suit me.
Fierce_LiNk Posted April 10, 2016 Posted April 10, 2016 In its current set-up, the answer would be "no fucking way!" The problem for me is that I wouldn't say it was excellent value for money. The online systems are a bit of a pain, tbh. Plus, there's still the uncertainty of certain games being online these days. Nintendoland and 3D World not being online is an example. So, I wouldn't pay just to play Smash Bros and Mario Kart online, because that's really the majority of what it would be. If there were major improvements, then I'd be more inclined to do so. It's worth it on the other systems because there are far more online games (I've spent a ridiculous amount of time on Rocket League and Battlefront) and it's just generally easier to get online, interact with your friends and get games up and running. It's easier to stream your footage, to record your videos, uploading them to facebook or youtube or whatever, no matter what game you're playing. The problem I have with Nintendo is that aside from Mario Kart and Smash, there's always a question mark around certain features. Things need to be embedded in the OS rather than just being game-to-game. I feel that I'm getting good value for money with PS+. I download and play the games, I go online regularly, I chat to people on there and I upload my saves to the cloud. Nintendo's online would also need to represent good value for money for me to pay for it.
Zell Posted April 10, 2016 Posted April 10, 2016 If they were to offer a similar service to that of Xbox Live Gold or PS Plus, as well as implementing properly thought-out online multiplayer in their games, then yes I would. Ultimately it would depend on what games I would want to play online and whether or not I would justify paying a subscription for that game. I cancelled my Xbox Live subscription when I stopped playing Halo. What games would Nintendo offer that would give me a fantastic online experience akin to Halo? Perhaps an online Pokemon RPG?
Fierce_LiNk Posted April 10, 2016 Posted April 10, 2016 If they did some kind of Netflix-like service with their back catalogue I'd be up for it. Anything akin to their current offering and I wouldn't. Out of all the console makers I think they are the only ones to be able to offer such a service without needing 3rd parties to chip in. Having a rental service for their NES, SNES, N64, GameCube and Wii first party software would be an amazing thing for a lot of people. I personally prefer to own software rather than renting but, again, it's another choice for the customer, which is only a good thing. I've been using PSNow thanks to Hero's recommendation. It's a veeeeeeery interesting concept. It's the Netflix of games. Instead of going out to buy an individual DVD, you stream the film. Same principle here. Instead of going out to buy The Last of Us, you stream the game. It's actually been really good so far and I can't believe it even works at all. I've played Ico and Tokyo Jungle through the service. I'm playing Sonic Generations and Darksiders at the moment. It's all been excellent. I think society might be moving towards streaming rather than purchasing. Previously, I used to buy CDs and Dvds. These days, I don't. I abuse Spotify, use Netflix daily and now use PSNow quite a lot. I think the idea of being able to stream a SNES game like A Link to the Past is appealing, tbh. I'd pay a subscription and have an access to a large pool of games rather than downloading the game onto one system. I downloaded Golden Axe from the Wii's VC and I only touched it a handful of times. It doesn't really bother me at all not physically owning the game. When downloading games, I never really feel like I own the game anyway. Downloading DriveClub and streaming Mortal Kombat X, I don't really feel that there's a tangible difference.
killthenet Posted April 10, 2016 Posted April 10, 2016 If they implemented a more feature packed online service, then I'd be happy to pay for it. Considering that what they offer is at the moment is free, I've never had any problems with it, it's always been quite reliable so I would hope that if they do offer a paid tier, that there is still free online gaming as well. Do Sony and Microsoft offer a basic free online service? Or is the only choice for online gaming a paid one? I feel like a lot of what Nintendo needs to do with online is at the OS level - allowing voice chat, a solid messaging service, ability to create and organise sessions from the main menu rather than through individual games. So I'd expect Nintendo to add some more incentives to a paid online platform, even if it were just something as simple as 20 Gold My Nintendo Points a month.
nekunando Posted April 10, 2016 Posted April 10, 2016 It really depends on what Nintendo are offering with the service. If everything was as it is with Wii U, I wouldn't pay for it and I'm also not particularly keen on the idea of not owning software so wouldn't like only having access to a selection of games while the service is active.
killthenet Posted April 10, 2016 Posted April 10, 2016 It really depends on what Nintendo are offering with the service. If everything was as it is with Wii U, I wouldn't pay for it and I'm also not particularly keen on the idea of not owning software so wouldn't like only having access to a selection of games while the service is active. I can definitely see the appeal of the streaming service, but like you I'd prefer it if I could actually buy virtual console games - especially with the fact that the My Nintendo account seems to be spelling the end to having to buy the same game on different systems, I won't mind a small upgrade fee for the games I've already got if it means I never have to buy it again. In theory, a streaming service would mean that Nintendo would offer a wider variety of VC games from the start, which we'd all welcome, but i'd hope they were available to buy as well. A situation where you can stream a game and try it out, then buy it if you like it would be quite nice.
Tamazoid Posted April 10, 2016 Posted April 10, 2016 Depends on what exclusive online multiplayer titles the NX has. If it has more games like Splatoon then I probably would shell out for an online subscription to be able to play games like those online. If it's just primarily multiplatform games that are utilising online/worth playing online multiplayer with I'll just stick to PC for those.
Hogge Posted April 10, 2016 Posted April 10, 2016 If the NX would have great online exclusives, I would OCCASIONALLY pay to play online. Maybe a month or two a year. However, I can also tell you that if online wasn't free, I wouldn't have bought Splatoon.
Serebii Posted April 10, 2016 Posted April 10, 2016 I wouldn't be happy with it, at all, but I would do it. They just better make it worth it
bob Posted April 10, 2016 Posted April 10, 2016 It depends on their game offering, they would need to have a stand-out game i wanted to play online. I bought Xbox Live to play Halo Reach, and i bought PS Plus to play Battlefront. If they made a really good online game for the NX then i would consider it. I'm not fussed about the online infrastructure too much, or free games (i don't use party chat, or any of the free games on PS4). However, of Nintendo's current online offerings, i never played Smash online, and only ventured once or twice with Mario Kart, so they would have to offer something a bit more tempting for me. Pokemon MMORPG would do.
somme Posted April 10, 2016 Posted April 10, 2016 They'd have to convince me to buy the console first. Nope, absolutely not.I don't even have online access where I live, so it'd be an utter waste of money for me. Well of course. There'd be no point paying for something you can't use. If you can't get online it doesn't really affect you either way.
Ronnie Posted April 10, 2016 Posted April 10, 2016 I remember being gobsmacked a few months ago when I found out PS4 charges you for online. I genuinely had no idea. Makes Nintendo's (admittedly more limited) offerings nice in comparison. Would I pay depends on what they offered but I suspect not, online gaming just isn't that big a deal for me. Certainly not enough to actually pay for the privilege.
Agent Gibbs Posted April 10, 2016 Posted April 10, 2016 If its similar to plus and includes free games, say virtual console games each month then i would
Guy Posted April 10, 2016 Posted April 10, 2016 I'll pay regardless because I'm a tool, but hopefully they at least make it a decent package in-line with their competitors.
dazzybee Posted April 10, 2016 Posted April 10, 2016 I'd pay it, whatever it was, but I wouldn't be happy; I'm not happy about paying for plus.... A system I actually rarely go online with (unlike Wii u/3ds) and have enjoyed about 2 plus games the past year. I think it would be a big mistake to charge for all online. free to play online but pay and you get party chat, an achievement system, a free vc game a month or whatever;Nellie saves etc seems reasonable I guess. Can't see them doing it though.
Recommended Posts