Nintendo Switch paid online coming 2018

[Ronnie]

Monster Hunter World, one of the 2018 contenders for game of the year. Packed full of content and things to do, universally loved... £18 on Amazon. And people still try and argue that gaming isn't cheaper than it's ever been.

[Goafer]

Monster Hunter wasn't released at £18 though. Nor is it the RRP set by the developer. Comparing a game that has been heavily discounted to the RRP of old games seems a bit silly to me.

I think the problem with this discussion (and virtually all discussions on the gaming industry) is that gaming isn't like movies or books. It's far more varied.

Ronnie: You're right, your style of gaming is absolutely cheaper than it's ever been. Base games now are cheaper than base games then.

The problem comes with the fact that in the old days the base game and the full game were the same thing. Now if you compare the full game then with the full game (day one DLC, preorder bonuses etc ), I'd say certain games are more expensive nowadays. 

In short, both sides of this discussion are right, depending on your style of gaming (full vs base game preference). Both opinions are valid IMO.

[Sheikah]

Monster Hunter World, one of the 2018 contenders for game of the year. Packed full of content and things to do, universally loved... £18 on Amazon. And people still try and argue that gaming isn't cheaper than it's ever been.

PS1 games are generally £3.99 on the PSN store. If we're going to look at non RRP prices, you could easily use that to argue that old games are cheaper than new ones.

I do agree with you Goafer, but I do think there is a general trend for AAA games to be giving you less game even in the base offering but padding it out. Not all big games for sure, but there is a general trend for it. I think the proliferation of the open world genre has contributed to this.

[Happenstance]

Where's this discussion coming from that games are cheaper now? A few years ago preordering a game was regularly around £30. Now if I see a game for £39.99 that's a good deal. A lot of new games are around £45 to 50.

[Ronnie]

29 minutes ago, Sheikah said:

PS1 games are generally £3.99 on the PSN store. If we're going to look at non RRP prices, you could easily use that to argue that old games are cheaper than new ones.

Well obviously games from 20+ years ago will be cheaper now. My point wasn’t about old games, but games from this generation being not only cheaper at RRP than before but also heavily discounted very soon after release.

You could even argue that your PS1 games proves my point even more. We have access to new games at rock bottom prices soon after release AND PS1 games at dirt cheap. Like I said “gaming in 2019” is cheaper than it’s ever been. 

 

[Sheikah]

Well obviously games from 20+ years ago will be cheaper now. My point wasn’t about old games, but games from this generation being not only cheaper at RRP than before but also heavily discounted very soon after release.You could even argue that your PS1 games proves my point even more. We have access to new games at rock bottom prices soon after release AND PS1 games at dirt cheap. Like I said “gaming in 2019” is cheaper than it’s ever been.   

 

Those PS1 games have been £3.99 for years. 

Let's put it this way - PS1 games were 2 generations old when being sold for £3.99 back on the PS3.

 

Similarly, PS2 games are now 2 generations old - but they're selling for more - at £11.99 on PS4.

 

If you're going to look at discounted, non-RRP prices, you could use the above to argue that games aren't being reduced to the same degree as we progress through the generations; or that games are generally settling at a more expensive 'final price' (and being considered as higher value products). It's why I generally think looking at short-term price reductions to measure cheapness generally doesn't mean much.

 

Ultimately I do think the RRP of big new games has gone up, or at the very least, the price we actually tend to pay for games at release. It's not uncommon to pay £50 or close to for new big games, whereas that wasn't really the case 10 years ago.

[Sméagol]

7 hours ago, Sheikah said:

Ultimately I do think the RRP of big new games has gone up, or at the very least, the price we actually tend to pay for games at release. It's not uncommon to pay £50 or close to for new big games, whereas that wasn't really the case 10 years ago.

I think you forget to take inflation into account. While I find this whole discussion boring, fact is suggested retail prices are lower than in the past, except for PC games, if we're talking base games. I have never payed less than 129 guilders for new N64 games, roughly 65 euros. Most were 149. I have never payed more than 60 euros for Switch games, with most "big games" costing 55 or 50. Of course, that's not necessarily the suggested retail price, which often is 60, but you make the distinction yourself, and it's still cheaper. NES games were the same (missed the SNES period back then), if I got a game for (much) cheaper, it was because the games were older and / or they needed to get rid them because it was the older generation and they weren't selling well with the SNES out. Some prices were even much higher than 129, even back in the NES days. Batman for NES went for 189 guilders I believe. That's roughly 95 euros. So roughly 95 pounds as well nowadays.

Exception is the price for PC games like I said, they have always been cheaper than console games, but publishers found an easy way to ask for more money by matching prices for PC games with their console counterparts. This is even more stupid than the "Switch tax". I refuse to pay such prices out of principle, luckily at least one store often has day 1 discounts were they simply use the old pricing for PC games. Go online and you pay the premium for pre-orders. To give you the numbers, PC games have tradionally been 99 guilders or 50 euros, but are often sold for 60 euros nowadays. I wonder with how much success, since discounts happen more often and more quickly as well.

Then is the dlc issue someone mentioned, which you also need to take into account of course, if you want to compare money spent on games, but don't forget we had expansion packs back then as well. Price for those was 30 euros, though I can't remember the guilder price for those. Maybe there is a sticker on my Firestorm expansion for Tiberian Sun, I'll have a look later.

[Sheikah]

I think you forget to take inflation into account. While I find this whole discussion boring, fact is suggested retail prices are lower than in the past, except for PC games, if we're talking base games. I have never payed less than 129 guilders for new N64 games, roughly 65 euros. Most were 149. I have never payed more than 60 euros for Switch games, with most "big games" costing 55 or 50. Of course, that's not necessarily the suggested retail price, which often is 60, but you make the distinction yourself, and it's still cheaper. NES games were the same (missed the SNES period back then), if I got a game for (much) cheaper, it was because the games were older and / or they needed to get rid them because it was the older generation and they weren't selling well with the SNES out. Some prices were even much higher than 129, even back in the NES days. Batman for NES went for 189 guilders I believe. That's roughly 95 euros. So roughly 95 pounds as well nowadays. Exception is the price for PC games like I said, they have always been cheaper than console games, but publishers found an easy way to ask for more money by matching prices for PC games with their console counterparts. This is even more stupid than the "Switch tax". I refuse to pay such prices out of principle, luckily at least one store often has day 1 discounts were they simply use the old pricing for PC games. Go online and you pay the premium for pre-orders. To give you the numbers, PC games have tradionally been 99 guilders or 50 euros, but are often sold for 60 euros nowadays. I wonder with how much success, since discounts happen more often and more quickly as well. Then is the dlc issue someone mentioned, which you also need to take into account of course, if you want to compare money spent on games, but don't forget we had expansion packs back then as well. Price for those was 30 euros, though I can't remember the guilder price for those. Maybe there is a sticker on my Firestorm expansion for Tiberian Sun, I'll have a look later. 

 

Yeah generally speaking I am not talking about just the entry cost of the game but what you're actually getting for your money with most AAA games these days. I am happy to have a discussion about what we're actually getting, but the argument that "gaming is cheaper now" is far too simple a view and overlooking reality, IMO. It can only be stated as fact if one simply pays no attention to what one is actually getting and looks only at the up front retail cost.

In keeping the entry cost roughly static (adjusted for inflation) they have made cuts to game design (which is now often lazy, missing previously free content, and frequently predatory - particularly at the top end), which is why I'd argue that the real cost has risen, just in shitty and insidious ways.

[Ronnie]

9 minutes ago, Sheikah said:

The actual cost in terms of game design (often predatory, lazy, and altogether fairly shite) is pretty plain to see.

I had no idea you disliked AAA gaming so much.

The actual reality is, a couple of games are predatory like Battlefront II, but the vast, vast majority of titles, be they AAA, AA or the better indies are packed full of enough quality content to warrant the price tag.

There's nothing "lazy" about the majority of the biggest releases this generation. And calling devs "lazy" is frankly incredibly immature.

Edited February 4, 2019 by Ronnie

[Sheikah]

 

 

 

 

I had no idea you disliked AAA gaming so much. The actual reality is, a couple of games are predatory like Battlefront II, but the vast, vast majority of titles, be they AAA, AA or the better indies are packed full of enough quality content to warrant the price tag.

There's nothing "lazy" about the majority of the biggest releases this generation. And calling devs "lazy" is frankly incredibly immature.

 

 

The actual reality is far from that Ronnie, and I think the discussion is going to have to end here if you're going to put words into my mouth. Game design is lazy, the game developers often aren't, and are working at the behest of publishers. And I was talking solely about AAA.

 

We are clearly never going to see eye to eye on this matter so this will be a circular argument.

[RedShell]

On 02/02/2019 at 9:53 PM, Glen-i said:

Why spend hours upon hours running around in huge games like Breath of the Wild in the hopes of finding something to do, when I can slap on something like Bayonetta 2, choose a level and have some fun in an over-the-top silly action game?

 

On 02/02/2019 at 11:31 PM, Dcubed said:

This is why we love Nintendo after all! They (mostly - I'm looking at YOU Breath of the Wild...) reject these modern trends, and continue to deliver real gameplay and gameplay value in their games!

Each to their own and all that, but I'm sorry, you guys are absolutely barmy when it comes to Breath of the Wild.

[Glen-i]

21 hours ago, RedShell said:

 

Each to their own and all that, but I'm sorry, you guys are absolutely barmy when it comes to Breath of the Wild.

If Breath of the Wild made me barmy, I'd give it less flak. That game is boring, dull and boring.

EDIT: Credit where credit is due though, it's better than Pokèmon Let's GO.

Edited February 5, 2019 by Glen-i

[RedShell]

37 minutes ago, Glen-i said:

That game is boring, dull and boring.

Only if the person playing it is boring, dull and boring.  

40 minutes ago, Glen-i said:

Credit where credit is due though, it's better than Pokèmon Let's GO.

 Well at least we can agree there.  

[Sméagol]

For those interested: there are games added to the voucher program.

https://ec.nintendo.com/GB/en/pretickets/70020000000081

Edited June 12, 2019 by Sméagol

[Ronnie]

Hmmm I really hope they add Animal Crossing eventually, I'll definitely use the service then. May as well, you're saving £16 which is more or less the cost of a year of Nintendo online!

[Kav]

Miyamoto is wrong, plain and simple.

 

[Mandalore]

They haven't fallen behind. They were always behind.

[Glen-i]

2 minutes ago, Mandalore said:

They haven't fallen behind. They were always behind.

Serious question, was that truly the case when Mario Kart DS came out?

[Ronnie]

You can't fall behind in a race you never entered.

They don't see VR as a priority or even as a core business at this moment in time. Fine by me, I much prefer them to concentrate on standard games.

[drahkon]

1 hour ago, Kav said:

Miyamoto is wrong, plain and simple.

He's wrong regarding the online service. But with regards to VR I have to agree with Ronnie, they haven't really entered the race.

[Ronnie]

Now Xbox on the other hand, they better hurry the f up and enter the race so I can play Elite Dangerous in VR, it feels like the game the platform was made for.

Edited July 8, 2019 by Ronnie

[Hero-of-Time]

55 minutes ago, Mandalore said:

They haven't fallen behind. They were always behind.

If anything they've gotten worse. At least the service used to be free but people are paying for it now and yet players still have to put up with online games being laggy messes, such as Smash, Mario Party and now Mario Maker 2. Plus, they took away Miiverse. I'm still bitter about that one. 

[Glen-i]

8 minutes ago, Hero-of-Time said:

Plus, they took away Miiverse. I'm still bitter about that one. 

Miiverse was a genuine rare moment where Nintendo were actually ahead of the competition in one aspect. But WiiU flopped, so almost everything to do with it was dropped.

Such a shame.

[Ronnie]

1 hour ago, Glen-i said:

Miiverse was a genuine rare moment where Nintendo were actually ahead of the competition in one aspect.

Hardly a rare moment. Miiverse just one example in a long list of times they've been ahead of the competition...

- Controller innovation (Rumble, speakers, analog sticks/triggers, shoulder buttons)
- the whole Switch concept
- Nintendo Direct
- Gold points loyatly scheme
- A fighting game with all your characters
- 3D
- Motion controls
- Classic consoles (at least compared to Sony and MS)
- Avatars
- Streetpass
- Family gaming
- Handheld consoles

Hell even the Satellaview, the original Games as Service concept! Nintendo are ahead of the curve in a huge number of ways. But yeah, their voice chat and online messaging systems aren't great.

Edited July 8, 2019 by Ronnie

[MindFreak]

I think he meant ahead of competition regarding online..