Helmsly Posted June 2, 2017 Posted June 2, 2017 Nintendo just put up some details about their paid online service for the Switch. Right now its just the US site, I'd imagine the EU site will have details in the morning: Online Play on Nintendo Switch You’ll be able to play compatible co-op and competitive games online by signing in with your Nintendo Account. Online play will be free for Nintendo Account holders until our paid online service launches in 2018. After the free-trial period, most games will require a paid online service subscription from Nintendo in order to play online. This service is only for Nintendo Switch. It does not affect online play or features for the Wii U or Nintendo 3DS family of systems. Online lobby and voice chat Our new dedicated smart device app will connect to Nintendo Switch and let you invite friends to play online, set play appointments, and chat with friends during online matches in compatible games─all from your smart device. A free, limited version of this app will be available for download in summer 2017. Classic Game Selection* Subscribers will get to download a compilation of classic titles with added online play, such as Super Mario Bros. 3, Balloon Fight and Dr. Mario. http://www.nintendo.com/switch/online-service/
liger05 Posted June 2, 2017 Posted June 2, 2017 Free until 2018. They struggling to get this network fully up to speed? That's quite the delay in paid services.
Helmsly Posted June 2, 2017 Author Posted June 2, 2017 (edited) Seems you can play any game you want from a library of NES games as long as you have a subscription: UPDATE (9:50pm): Nintendo confirmed that this monthly plan has indeed changed, telling Kotaku: “Nintendo Switch Online subscribers will have ongoing access to a library of classic games with added online play. Users can play as many of the games as they want, as often as they like, as long as they have an active subscription.” ^via kotaku IGN: Does the compilation of classic games include Super Nintendo and Nintendo 64 games? Nintendo: At launch, the classic game library will include NES games. Super NES games continue to be under consideration, but we have nothing further to announce at this time. ^from IGN Edited June 2, 2017 by Helmsly
Charlie Posted June 2, 2017 Posted June 2, 2017 Can't argue with the price. It will almost certainly convert to £19.99 a year. Still disappointed that you need to use an app but at least HORI are releasing a headset that combines game and chat audio. I'd like some info on a real VC now, please.
Hero-of-Time Posted June 2, 2017 Posted June 2, 2017 I'm happy they've seen some sense and are making it so the VC titles stick around, just like PS+/GwG games. What does concern me is the wording they use. They say most games will require a paid subscription when playing online. They better not start cherry picking what does or doesn't use the subscription fee. Seems a little unfair if they do that. At least we've got until next year to keep playing for free. I wonder what issues they are running into that has caused a delay for the service?
Dcubed Posted June 2, 2017 Posted June 2, 2017 I'm happy they've seen some sense and are making it so the VC titles stick around, just like PS+/GwG games. What does concern me is the wording they use. They say most games will require a paid subscription when playing online. They better not start cherry picking what does or doesn't use the subscription fee. Seems a little unfair if they do that. At least we've got until next year to keep playing for free. I wonder what issues they are running into that has caused a delay for the service? I suspect that the ones that won't require the subscription are mmos like DQ10 and apps like Netflix, same as on other platforms. The lack of SNES games here gives the impression that they are really very behind on the Switch VC. Hope that's not the case...
Hero-of-Time Posted June 2, 2017 Posted June 2, 2017 The lack of SNES games here gives the impression that they are really very behind on the Switch VC. Hope that's not the case... Some people have suggested this is because a SNES Mini is on the way. Once it's limited release is over then they will put those games on the service. It's a fair shout. Milk people with the Mini and then get them to buy the games again once the Switch versions arrive.
Serebii Posted June 2, 2017 Posted June 2, 2017 I'm happy they've seen some sense and are making it so the VC titles stick around, just like PS+/GwG games. What does concern me is the wording they use. They say most games will require a paid subscription when playing online. They better not start cherry picking what does or doesn't use the subscription fee. Seems a little unfair if they do that. At least we've got until next year to keep playing for free. I wonder what issues they are running into that has caused a delay for the service? I imagine Pokémon is going to be exempt and that Game Freak strongarmed them into it
Hero-of-Time Posted June 2, 2017 Posted June 2, 2017 I imagine Pokémon is going to be exempt and that Game Freak strongarmed them into it This is what worries me. If you are going to have a service like this then no game should be exempt from it. It should be all or nothing. Why should someone have to pay for something like Splatoon, ARMS, Monster Hunter, Smash Bros or Mario Kart but not for Pokemon? It's a big middle finger to gamers who like games other than Pokemon.
Serebii Posted June 2, 2017 Posted June 2, 2017 I suspect that the ones that won't require the subscription are mmos like DQ10 and apps like Netflix, same as on other platforms. The lack of SNES games here gives the impression that they are really very behind on the Switch VC. Hope that's not the case... Don't forget that this isn't the Switch VC. These ones are being altered to allow for online play for this service.
Julius Posted June 2, 2017 Posted June 2, 2017 Weirdly, the U.K. site has been updated with a numerically equal pricing, but with a euro preceding these values (you have to assume that's a hiccup on Nintendo's part), and pricing is numerically equal for our euro-using counterparts too. What I find especially interesting is the change in plan from a one game per month rental system for classic titles to a library of these games, and I do genuinely think that Nintendo heard the backlash from fans last time (and may have even also paid close attention to the alternatives they had to suggest, as a library of classic Nintendo games is an idea that's been kicking around for a long time). I'm even more intrigued by how they plan to allow access to this library: will I be allowed to download one or two classic titles per month in a similar fashion to PS Plus for PlayStation and Games with Gold for Xbox? Or will it be a rental system where I have access to one game at a time, which I can rent for as long as I please and "trade in" for another classic title upon completing/being satisfied with the game? Another big worry I've seen going around is what this means for Virtual Console, but I think it will work similarly to PS+/GwG: whilst NES titles, and any other titles released for the Classics Library in the future (I have no doubt SNES games will be added after the release of an SNES Mini as mentioned above), will be available to Switch Online members on a currently undisclosed basis, and all of these games will be available on a permanent basis through Virtual Console (with the likely annual addition of the next generation of titles to the library). However, just what this means for N64 games I'm not too sure: NES games were optimised for the NES Classic/Mini, SNES games are reportedly being optimised for an SNES Classic/Mini this Christmas, and, last I checked, Eurogamer were reporting that the same team was also working to optimise GameCube games for the Switch Virtual Console too (and coming this year). Just where does this leave the optimisation of N64 games? Finally: I think the delay to the paid service is a stroke of genius, whether it was caused by technical (or other) issues on Nintendo's end or not. Online console servers are often most stressed around Christmas time, and releasing a paid service which could be met with a ridiculously high demand would put Nintendo in a difficult position - and due it being paid, the rights of a paying consumer being in place - if there were further online technical issues (haven't seen any problems with ARMS's online during the Testpunch mind, but I recall some issues being apparent with MK8D). In a world where, this autumn, the Scorpio will likely be launching with a £400/£500 price tag and where PlayStation will likely be getting £50 price cuts on console hardware, and with Nintendo likely to see prices fall to £250 at least during the Christmas sales period, the question for people entering the world of gaming - whether purchasing for themselves or for others - is what gets me the most for my money? And, with a free online service for the rest of this year (and possibly up until the end of Q1 next year) compared to the heftier PS+/GwG pricings (with 12 month subscriptions more-or-less being equal to the cost of a new game), and with the eventual paid online service being half the cost of the competitors, I think that this is a more than sound idea for Nintendo. However: news on the paid online service must be provided before we head into the Christmas shopping window, or else they risk losing potential customers to the lack of information we've seen up to this point regarding many of the Switch's online services.
Serebii Posted June 2, 2017 Posted June 2, 2017 This is what worries me. If you are going to have a service like this then no game should be exempt from it. It should be all or nothing. Why should someone have to pay for something like Splatoon, ARMS, Monster Hunter, Smash Bros or Mario Kart but not for Pokemon? It's a big middle finger to gamers who like games other than Pokemon. There are some games exempt on XBL and PSN though. This is not an uncommon practice.
Hero-of-Time Posted June 2, 2017 Posted June 2, 2017 There are some games exempt on XBL and PSN though. This is not an uncommon practice. The ones that are exempt are FTP games that rely on heavy microtransactions or MMRPGs that have a subscription service. Basically games that require money being spent on them. You get the free weekend here and there for other game but that's it. Unless Pokemon somehow changes the way a consumer buys the game ( making it FTP ) or finally makes it in to a MMRPG that a lot of us want then I can't see how this is fair. Just because the series is big doesn't mean it should get a free pass. It would be like Microsoft saying that Halo is their biggest FPS franchise and because of that it will not require XBL to play online. You have to wonder what 3rd parties would think of such a setup. If they aren't getting a cut of the online service money then why should they be happy that gamers have to pay extra to play their game online but not one of Nintendo's own?
Julius Posted June 2, 2017 Posted June 2, 2017 This is what worries me. If you are going to have a service like this then no game should be exempt from it. It should be all or nothing. Why should someone have to pay for something like Splatoon, ARMS, Monster Hunter, Smash Bros or Mario Kart but not for Pokemon? It's a big middle finger to gamers who like games other than Pokemon. I'm in agreement with this as a big Pokémon fan, but I think there are certainly ways to work around this for this particular franchise. Pokémon Bank, for anyone that doesn't use/isn't aware of it, is an online, paid-for subscription service, primarily used as a tool for transferring Pokémon between games directly incompatible with one another (more often than not being of different generations of games), and is a service that comes with a number of rare, Bank-exclusive Pokémon distributions (iirc, we had a special Celebi at launch, and have had other rare or legendary Pokémon made available to Bank users too) as something of a bonus. I can see why Nintendo would want Pokémon to be exempt from this, but instead of simply being exempt, I can see Bank's price being inflated (perhaps up to double of what it stands at, ~£10) and the service being incorporated into Pokémon Online, a service that can, like Bank, is linked to the games and could retain Bank's key features as well as adding services currently provided by the Global Link service.
Hero-of-Time Posted June 2, 2017 Posted June 2, 2017 I'm in agreement with this as a big Pokémon fan, but I think there are certainly ways to work around this for this particular franchise. Pokémon Bank, for anyone that doesn't use/isn't aware of it, is an online, paid-for subscription service, primarily used as a tool for transferring Pokémon between games directly incompatible with one another (more often than not being of different generations of games), and is a service that comes with a number of rare, Bank-exclusive Pokémon distributions (iirc, we had a special Celebi at launch, and have had other rare or legendary Pokémon made available to Bank users too) as something of a bonus. I can see why Nintendo would want Pokémon to be exempt from this, but instead of simply being exempt, I can see Bank's price being inflated (perhaps up to double of what it stands at, ~£10) and the service being incorporated into Pokémon Online, a service that can, like Bank, is linked to the games and could retain Bank's key features as well as adding services currently provided by the Global Link service. That's an interesting solution. Although you then pee people off you want to play both Pokemon and other games online. That person would then have to pay £30 a year instead of £25. What they could do is just scrap the fee for Bank and then just include as part of the £20 online service.
Julius Posted June 2, 2017 Posted June 2, 2017 That's an interesting solution. Although you then pee people off you want to play both Pokemon and other games online. That person would then have to pay £30 a year instead of £25. What they could do is just scrap the fee for Bank and then just include as part of the £20 online service. Yeah, that dawned on me shortly after submitting my reply I agree, it would be better for it to be included in the £20 online service, though I think that depends on the future direction of the franchise as a whole. Concerning the likely next release, Stars, though, I think that Bank being included with (or perhaps being at a discounted price for? I know a handful of Nintendo fans who play Pokémon more-or-less exclusively these days) Switch Online would be the smarter move (as it will, reportedly, and most likely, be using the same engine and HD assets found buried in Sun and Moon) for now.
Kaepora_Gaebora Posted June 2, 2017 Posted June 2, 2017 This smacks of "even we still don't really know what our online service will be, so we are getting this out there now to avoid getting bogged down with it at e3" Still, £20 a year is very decent, especially if it allows access to NES games; that's an acknowledgement that everyone has already bought them millions of times, so have these to sweeten the deal but pay full whack for N64/Cube VC titles thank you very much!
S.C.G Posted June 2, 2017 Posted June 2, 2017 If having to use (or even own in the first place) a smartphone is a barrier to entry for voice chat on the Switch, then it's a part of the service I simply won't be using. The sooner we get full clarification on this and other currently absent features of the machine *cough*VirtualConsole*cough* the better. : peace: Oh well, no voice chat for me then, at least I know in advance now. Now I just need confirmation on this library of NES titles, surely Nintendo aren't going to have a set of online enabled titles then have non-online versions for the Virtual Console? The waiting game continues...
drahkon Posted June 2, 2017 Posted June 2, 2017 Seems like a good price. Only NES at the moment is a shame, though.
nekunando Posted June 2, 2017 Posted June 2, 2017 (edited) The price is considerably less than I expected, which is great, as is the ability to play a selection of classic games online at any time while subscribed.. it's just a shame that it only appears to be NES games at this point What is happening with the Virtual Console at this point? I have funds available on my Switch waiting to build a library of portable SNES and N64 titles (anything else will be a bonus ) but I was hoping for it to arrive fairly soon. I'm almost worried that it isn't going to come at all.. but surely it will! The ability to play Mario Kart 8 Deluxe, ARMS, Splatoon 2 and maybe even FIFA (if it's decent ) online for free for the rest of 2017 is very welcome Edited June 2, 2017 by nekunando Automerged Doublepost
Ronnie Posted June 2, 2017 Posted June 2, 2017 £20 a year is a great price, probably be a couple of quid cheaper too.
Julius Posted June 2, 2017 Posted June 2, 2017 What is happening with the Virtual Console at this point? I have funds available on my Switch waiting to build a library of portable SNES and N64 titles (anything else will be a bonus ) but I was hoping for it to arrive fairly soon. I'm almost worried that it isn't going to come at all.. but surely it will! I think it's more than likely that we'll have Virtual Console by the end of this year, but I think the question is where do they show it? at this point. E3, of course, would make a lot of sense, but adversely, for the same reason fans believe that a Super Smash Bros. for Switch announcement at this event would be a poor one, potentially overshadowing ARMS days before release, so too could a Virtual Console announcement, and especially if Melee is coming to Switch via VC along with a slew of others optimised GameCube titles. Though Nintendo will have livestreams and most eyes on them, closing E3 out as they did last year, E3 having a focus on new upcoming titles is much more important, in my eyes. An announcement not too long after E3 via a Direct, in a similar fashion as to how a Fire Emblem Direct came shortly after the January Switch presentation, could keep eyes firmly on Nintendo (and a launch of Virtual Console not too long after this could be great for them and fans in plenty of ways). I'm certainly going to start worrying, however, if we hear nothing by the end of the summer regarding Virtual Console, perhaps even more so because of the update on Switch Online.
dazzybee Posted June 2, 2017 Posted June 2, 2017 The whole virtual console thing is very worrying. NES games being for this service makes loads of sense, most of the are pretty bad so getting them free is nice, with added online. Weird originally it said SNES games would have online features and now SNES may not feature at all... Switch is a perfect console for me, being able to play nes snes n64 gamecube wii and handheld games would be utterly incredible, and I thought was an obvious sure fire thing. But it's all worrying... What's nice is they are getting all this, arms and platoon info out the way, saving E3 for the games!! Also makes me wish Sony did a cheap version like this. I don't even subscribe to plus anymore at the minute, but the games have been pretty much awful for me for over a year, I don't really voice chat anyway, not sure why it's so high.... if they did a barebones £20 version like this that'd be perfect!!
Serebii Posted June 2, 2017 Posted June 2, 2017 Q 『クラシックゲームセレクション（仮称）』は、バーチャルコンソール（VC）とは別物でしょうか？A 今回ご紹介した『クラシックゲームセレクション（仮称）』は、VCとは異なる、クラシックゲームに新たな機能を追加したソフトとなります。Nintendo SwitchではVCの販売予定は未定のままです。 Virtual Console is different to the Classic Game Selection. VC launch is still undecided.
dazzybee Posted June 2, 2017 Posted June 2, 2017 What is undecided? If they're going to do it? When they're going to do it? When they're going to announce it?
Recommended Posts