Nintendo Switch paid online coming 2018

[Hero-of-Time]

11 hours ago, Ronnie said:

Personally I'm paying 1 quid 50 a month for a Netflix style NES library, £18 a year for that suits me fine, especially when they add SNES games. The online, cloud saves and discounts is just a bonus.

I honestly think this is the best way to approach this whole thing, especially if you do want to have a collection of NES games at your fingertips. It's a pretty decent deal when you compare it to the NES Classic that launched at around £70 and had just 30 games installed on it. For £20 a year you are already getting more games than that and with added online features.

[Ike]

I feel like this thread just loops everytime we trying to have a discussion, people need to realise that other people may have different wants out of the service and if that service isn't offered then they obviously won't want to spend money on that service no matter what the price is, if they were happy then they would pay it. Why would pay money for an ISP that doesn't give me the download/upload speeds I want? Why pay more Netflix if they don't have the movies I like, the fact it's £5.99 or w/e a month doesn't matter, it's a waste of money paying for it if it doesn't do what I want.

It feels like you're trying to suppress other people and force your opinion and it stifles discussion.

---

I'll be paying for the service, I play enough games online to justify it, cloud saves are nice (NoA and NoE have both said different things about keeping the saves after the subscription has ended, Nintendo are being unclear as usual). I want the NES games even though I have the NES Mini as it means I have portable versions, the added online I'm not too fussed about. It also means I can try out games I might not have bought individually. I'd prefer not to have to pay for online but £18 isn't too bad.It costs money to run servers, I don't blame Nintendo for wanting to get some of the money back for it.

[Kaxxx]

In 3 weeks time this will have all settled down and we can get on with playing games and not having panic attacks about scenarios like: "a tank ran over my Switch but I didn't renew my subscription because my electricity went off because I forgot to pay it so my WiFi didn't work and i lost my 2 year old saves for games I don't play anymore and..."

Edited September 16, 2018 by Kaxxx

[Helmsly]

As much as I don't like the fact that Nintendo are charging for online, I accepted that a price tag was on the way and figured I'd be paying for it when the times comes. But I had also assumed that the service itself would be improved by now. But it hasn't. Which is why, to me, the extras are distractions as I only care about is the Online service itself.

If I had not spent the past year or so playing Splatoon 2 regularly, building a rank and whatnot, then I would shrug with total indifference to them charging online and just not care. It would be like them announcing they're charging people for playing their 3DS online from next week. It dosn't matter how cheap it is or if they throw in some roms of their oldest games, it simply wouldn't be worth it.

Edited September 16, 2018 by Helmsly

[Pestneb]

2 hours ago, Ike said:

 Why would pay money for an ISP that doesn't give me the download/upload speeds I want?

Because no other ISP provides better service? my connection is shocking most of the time... sometimes it goes up to 12mbps, but usually the best I can hope for is 2mbps, and most of the time it's sub 1mbps. Apparently within the next 4-5 years we should be getting fibre but... yeah, to link into the topic more, paying for an online service seems a bit silly in my current situation (ignoring a fact I'm yet to grab a switch :()
Netflix seems to struggle along ok (not sure how they manage that) but pretty much any other video based online streaming fails. Wii U (splatoon and mk8) seems to be coping ok, but it still drops out enough to drain some of the fun out.

But yes, I agree totally with what you say Ike, the value for money depends entirely on what you want to get out of the service.
Not been following this too closely, but if the cloud is backing up data, ie I have a local storage solution available to me as well, then great, for £1.50 a better quality service for MK8 and splatoon 2 sounds good. my main issue is the quality of the service and price - the Wii U had a free service and for me, adequate online connectivity (emphasis on "for me") so now increasing this to £1.50 a month (which I guess is near the minimum they could realistically charge without it being super petty/unprofitable for Nintendo's part)  should come with a reasonable boost in what people get out of the service, and any future price hikes should be reflected in a boost in the end product... just saying!

In any case, it will be interesting to see what the service looks like in a few months from now (I assume some teething problems will be cropping up around launch!!)

[Ronnie]

4 hours ago, Hero-of-Time said:

I honestly think this is the best way to approach this whole thing, especially if you do want to have a collection of NES games at your fingertips. It's a pretty decent deal when you compare it to the NES Classic that launched at around £70 and had just 30 games installed on it. For £20 a year you are already getting more games than that and with added online features.

Exactly. Especially if they throw in SNES games (with online) like they said they would...

[Julius]

2 hours ago, Ronnie said:

Exactly. Especially if they throw in SNES games (with online) like they said they would...

Honestly, it feels like they’ve brushed their original “NES and SNES games with leaderboards” statement completely under the rug, and I don’t think it’s helped them in this case. It won’t be part of the service at launch, sure, but I think that mentioning that SNES games would be coming to the service in the future as part of that snippet in the Direct could have been a helpful boost for them, and any other systems with games coming to the service beyond that too, because if it’s in the works — well, why not? We’ve seen them do it with Metroid Prime 4 and next year’s Pokémon game, and I don’t think that it tarnishes the possible future “wow factor” of shadow dropping, for instance, SNES games to the service after a Direct next year. 

It just strikes me as odd: Nintendo has every reason to be confident in their system selling well, just given the records that the Switch has toppled alone, yet they seem a little unsure of themselves (to me) when it comes to announcing their plans for legacy titles — I mean, should we not be expecting SNES titles to come to the Switch now that they’ve seemingly shied away from that, having let it slip last year? Absolutely not, because there’s no doubt in my mind that they’ll be coming. So why not just say something and give their consumers even more of a reason to be confident in their future plans for the Switch, beyond the already revealed first party software coming to the system within the next few years? 

I don’t mean to come across as negative, I just think that they could have handled this situation a bit better than they have. It’s not the end of the world, but I think that effectively communicating with their consumers is something that they could still wildly improve at — they did a great job with this during the Switch presentation last January, so why the change in formula since? Time and time again we’ve had some heated discussions on here about how Nintendo could handle Online for those already playing Splatoon 2, Mario Kart 8 Deluxe, etc., which I do think clearly shows a divide between what fans want and expect from Nintendo, but it really feels like a solution to this could have been as simple as offering an extended free trial period (a month as opposed to a week, for instance) or an exclusive discounted NSO pricing for those already heavily invested in those games, and we shouldn’t have needed to have such a heated discussion - as fans and consumers of Nintendo - in the first (or second, or third ) place. 

I’m totally going to sign up for the service once I get a Switch, just for the ease of use so that I don’t have to worry about my subscription and whether or not I will or will not be able to enjoy a game to it’s full extent, and also because I haven’t played many of those NES games. Now if only they could just start churning out those N64 and GameCube remasters, and get Square Enix to start selling some classic JRPG collections for the Switch... 

Edited September 16, 2018 by Julius Caesar

[Kaxxx]

^^^ well said. I think we all need to calm down a touch and remember this is just the beginning of the service. It will improve with experience and jumping on the gaming hysteria bandwagon does nothing to help. 

[Hero-of-Time]

19 minutes ago, Kaxxx said:

It will improve with experience and jumping on the gaming hysteria bandwagon does nothing to help. 

True, but at the same time, Nintendo have had YEARS to look at what the other consoles and handhelds have been doing in terms of online gaming and learn from them. Yes, it should improve with time but the fact we've gotten this far into the Switch lifespan and they've still yet to meet features that a 360 had does not leave me hopeful.

It seems we have the same song and dance with every console and handheld that Nintendo release. Their online features are pretty rubbish, we expect it to improve over the lifespan of the console, it doesn't and then we all say things like "They'll get it right with their next console" and of course they don't.

They should have brought back Miiverse for subscribes. I would have signed up instantly for the return of that. In terms of online features it was the one good thing they came up with and they killed it off.   

[Kaxxx]

I agree to an extent. Nintendo underwhelm...fact but at the same time the gaming community have unrealistic and idealist ideas of the way things should be. 

[Hero-of-Time]

1 minute ago, Kaxxx said:

I agree to an extent. Nintendo underwhelm...fact but at the same time the gaming community have unrealistic and idealist ideas of the way things should be. 

Personally, I don't think it's unrealistic to expect online features that have been standard on every other console and handheld for around 10 years now. I mean, when something like a Vita can offer things like party chat and instant messaging, but a console released in 2017 can't, then I think there are issues and I understand why many are frustrated with Nintendo's weird stance to online gaming.

[Emerald Emblem]

The only way I think sceptics will buy into this fee for online, is if Nintendo can flip a switch at launch of the online service which makes the online better than before.

[markderoos]

21 minutes ago, Hero-of-Time said:

Personally, I don't think it's unrealistic to expect online features that have been standard on every other console and handheld for around 10 years now. I mean, when something like a Vita can offer things like party chat and instant messaging, but a console released in 2017 can't, then I think there are issues and I understand why many are frustrated with Nintendo's weird stance to online gaming.

I think Nintencan but Nintenwont...

[Helmsly]

1 hour ago, Hero-of-Time said:

True, but at the same time, Nintendo have had YEARS to look at what the other consoles and handhelds have been doing in terms of online gaming and learn from them. Yes, it should improve with time but the fact we've gotten this far into the Switch lifespan and they've still yet to meet features that a 360 had does not leave me hopeful.

It seems we have the same song and dance with every console and handheld that Nintendo release. Their online features are pretty rubbish, we expect it to improve over the lifespan of the console, it doesn't and then we all say things like "They'll get it right with their next console" and of course they don't.

They should have brought back Miiverse for subscribes. I would have signed up instantly for the return of that. In terms of online features it was the one good thing they came up with and they killed it off.   

I agree with all of this. If they had bought back stuff like Miiverse and other things that directly impact or improve the online component of the Switch then I would be fine with paying for it. But by the looks of things, they're not.

Also, I am not a fan of the idea of paying for a service while having some kind of blind faith or hope that they might improve it in the future, rather then them having those features ready one day one. Especially after all this time of supposedly working on the thing.

Nintendo have never paid attention to having an online service on the same level's as the other consoles in all these years, but somehow managed to pay attention to the fact that those companies charge for them, so they decided to do the same without even matching what the others have to offer.

[Hero-of-Time]

Man, I miss Miiverse. It was such a neat thing. Being able to post your pictures and progress, looking at other people's adventures, helping out those who were stuck....what a shame.  

[Nintendo Fan]

I doubt things will change that phone app is here to stay, this IS Nintendo we're talking about after all.

5 minutes ago, Kaxxx said:

I agree to an extent. Nintendo underwhelm...fact but at the same time the gaming community have unrealistic and idealist ideas of the way things should be. 

How is asking for a proper online infrastructure unrealistic?? Sony and Microsoft have been doing it for years and Nintendo decides to leave it out of the Switch, then creates a phone app that has some of the feature we're asking for. So why couldn't Nintendo implement all those features into the Switch or the Nintendo Switch Online they're now selling.  

It really baffles me how anyone can defend Nintendo on this.. 

Either way I'm still getting the online so I can continue playing but not happy about the sub-par features. As for the NES games it's a nice touch but the package as a whole stinks.

[Helmsly]

6 minutes ago, Hero-of-Time said:

Man, I miss Miiverse. It was such a neat thing. Being able to post your pictures and progress, looking at other people's adventures, helping out those who were stuck....what a shame.  

Me too. I remember when I got my Wii U, a year after launch and was playing through Mario 3D World. I died on a stage and the Continue screen had Miiverse posts scrolling the top and bottom of the page, from other people who were also stuck on that level trying to find a particular green star. I clicked on one of the messages and it was a string of people all helping this guy find it and all the posts were posted within the past 5 minutes. There was something very cool about seeing that a bunch of strangers were all playing the same game and same stage, all helping each other out at the same time.

When it was integrated into a game like that, is was awesome. Like finding messages in bottles in Wind Waker, the graffiti in Splatoon (which is kind of back now in the sequel) or messages showing up in levels in Mario Maker

It was far from perfect, but they could have improved upon it and made it a really valuable feature. Instead they axed it

[Sheikah]

I agree to an extent. Nintendo underwhelm...fact but at the same time the gaming community have unrealistic and idealist ideas of the way things should be. 

I'm a bit lost by this - what do you mean?

Just an example, but on Switch you can't even message friends on your friends list. To me it'll be absolutely absurd if this stays the same after they start charging, and not unreasonable to challenge them about it. At present you cannot arrange matchmaking without using external means which is pretty crazy in this day and age.

[Ronnie]

1 hour ago, Kaxxx said:

I agree to an extent. Nintendo underwhelm...fact but at the same time the gaming community have unrealistic and idealist ideas of the way things should be. 

This. Absolutely this.

[Hero-of-Time]

34 minutes ago, Ronnie said:

This. Absolutely this.

So you think it's unrealistic for basic things like messaging?

[Serebii]

2 hours ago, Hero-of-Time said:

Personally, I don't think it's unrealistic to expect online features that have been standard on every other console and handheld for around 10 years now. I mean, when something like a Vita can offer things like party chat and instant messaging, but a console released in 2017 can't, then I think there are issues and I understand why many are frustrated with Nintendo's weird stance to online gaming.

Yeah I don't think can't is the right word here. It's they choose not to, probably so they don't get repeats of this bullshit

 

https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/secret-paedophile-armies-prepare-pictochat-onslaught

[Ronnie]

5 minutes ago, Hero-of-Time said:

So you think it's unrealistic for basic things like messaging?

The comment from @Kaxxx has nothing to do with messaging on a Switch. I meant generally speaking, the gamer community absolutely, 100% has unrealistic expectations. Broadly speaking, a lot of gamers want everything for nothing. ie. how £18 a year is apparently 'too expensive' for a Netflix like service of ever-expanding NES games. Or video games can't be more than £45, but they also can't have DLC, or microtransactions, or lootboxes, or season passes. You can't go two days without the community being outraged about something, or demanding this that or the other not just from publishers, but from devs themselves. There's expecting fair treatment and appropriate content for the price, and there's going too far and I think a lot of gamers, do the latter.

Edited September 16, 2018 by Ronnie

[Hero-of-Time]

1 minute ago, Serebii said:

Yeah I don't think can't is the right word here. It's they choose not to, probably so they don't get repeats of this bullshit

 

https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/secret-paedophile-armies-prepare-pictochat-onslaught

Then what in the hell is the point of the parental features that they've harped on about before? Also, as stated MANY times before on here, why not allow messaging and communication just between people on your friends list.

2 minutes ago, Ronnie said:

The comment from @Kaxxx has nothing to do with messaging on a Switch. I meant generally speaking, the gamer community absolutely, 100% has unrealistic expectations. Broadly speaking, a lot of gamers want everything for nothing. ie. how £18 a year is apparently 'too expensive' for a Netflix like service of ever-expanding NES games. Or video games can't be more than £45, but they also can't have DLC, or microtransactions, or lootboxes, or season passes. You can't go two days without the community being outraged about something, or demanding this that or the other not just from publishers, but from devs themselves.

Considering the comments were made after my post about the Switch lacking basic features that the 360 had, I think it has everything to do with things like messaging.

 

[Ronnie]

8 hours ago, Kaxxx said:

In 3 weeks time this will have all settled down and we can get on with playing games and not having panic attacks about scenarios like: "a tank ran over my Switch but I didn't renew my subscription because my electricity went off because I forgot to pay it so my WiFi didn't work and i lost my 2 year old saves for games I don't play anymore and..."

I remember the hysteria about how long Nintendo were taking to reveal what the NX was. That was forgotten about 5 seconds after the debut trailer launched. People just like to complain these days, it helps when there's a big social network giving megaphones to everyone.

10 minutes ago, Hero-of-Time said:

Considering the comments were made after my post about the Switch lacking basic features that the 360 had, I think it has everything to do with things like messaging.

I can't speak for @Kaxxx but I really don't think he was saying "the gaming community are being unrealistic expecting basic things like a messaging feature". I think he was speaking more broadly.

Also do people really use messaging on consoles these days? What with Whatsapp, and texting, twitter, facebook etc. It's the same as wanting a web browser, I never understood that either when people have access to web browsers everywhere.

I'm not saying I don't think it should be there, it absolutely should, but I just don't think it's that big a deal. Maybe I'm wrong.

Edited September 16, 2018 by Ronnie

[Mr-Paul]

£18 isn't too expensive for an ever-expanding library of NES games. But this isn't about the NES games. This is about the online service. You can't just deflect from how poor everything else is by saying 'but free NES games!' 

Giving away some 30 year old games really doesn't stop the online service from being antiquated. The NES games are a free extra. The main point of the service is to play new games online. That you can't communicate with your friends list, make a party etc., all basic features from the console itself is ridiculous. 

They should have the subscription for NES games. Online play should be separate, and free while it doesn't offer features which have been standard for years, even regressing from the Wii U.

Edited September 16, 2018 by Mr-Paul