Jimbob Posted February 20, 2018 Posted February 20, 2018 Cloud saving in this day and age should be essential, heck even the option for back-up via other storage should be viable. It's shocking that Ninty don't offer this service with the Switch at the moment.
Nicktendo Posted February 20, 2018 Posted February 20, 2018 13 minutes ago, Jimbob said: Cloud saving in this day and age should be essential, heck even the option for back-up via other storage should be viable. It's shocking that Ninty don't offer this service with the Switch at the moment. I thought the whole reason they didn't offer back up storage was because of how quickly and easily the Wii, Wii U and 3DS were exploited? Cloud saving should be standard in 2018, especially if your security team can't securely develop an alternative. Really hoping it comes soon. 1
RedShell Posted February 20, 2018 Posted February 20, 2018 3 minutes ago, Nicktendo said: I thought the whole reason they didn't offer back up storage was because of how quickly and easily the Wii, Wii U and 3DS were exploited? I believe so, yeah. But that kind of thing is inevitable anyway (Switch has already been hacked ) so if it's still the whole reason behind not offering any form of save backup option, then they need to come up with a better reason, or just get with the program already.
Sheikah Posted February 20, 2018 Posted February 20, 2018 (edited) 1 hour ago, RedShell said: It doesn’t even have to be cloud saves It most definitely does have to be cloud saves. Manual save exporting will do nothing when something actually goes wrong spontaneously. Edited February 20, 2018 by Sheikah 1
RedShell Posted February 20, 2018 Posted February 20, 2018 1 minute ago, Sheikah said: It most definitely does have to be cloud saves. Manual saves will do nothing when something actually goes wrong spontaneously. True. I'd still like to have the option of both though. 1
Rummy Posted February 20, 2018 Posted February 20, 2018 On 19/02/2018 at 9:36 AM, dazzybee said: Has any company added online after a time and not charged for it? 23 hours ago, dazzybee said: I don't care if no ones ever launched a service half way through. It makes no business sense, no logic sense, it'll make it confusing and clumsy and in pretty much every way it's a bad idea from Nintendo's perspective. Please have some regard for yourself dazzy, I know you're not and I'm not looking to come down on this - but you HAVE to surely see how easily this is justification for a trolling/flamebaiting accusation when two such polar opposite statements are posted not that many hours apart. Don't get me wrong though - I agree with you it WOULD be stupid business sense to split the service into two halves, but it's ALSO imo stupid business sense to suddenly charge for a free service halfway through that I am pretty much 100% confident will get complaints from consumers who will say they did not realise this was going to happen and why did the game they could play for free yesterday suddenly become not free etcetc. I can't say I've got a sensible middle ground solution between both of these stupid ideas either. On 19/02/2018 at 11:31 AM, Julius Caesar said: I agree. Personally, I too would rather see them charge for everything, but I think the main problem is that, even if Nintendo has been clear that a paid online is coming, retroactively adding that 18 months into the system's life seems a bit...odd, and it could be a pretty confusing for more casual and/or younger gamers who frequently play games like Splatoon 2 already. Your whole post was great but I wanted to respond to this. A few months back I was at my mate's who has a Switch and we played a bit, then I came into the conversation of why I didn't want one before knowing about online etcetc. I explained the issues I perceived with a variety of their previous implementations of online - but when I said that one day he'll have to pay to play online for Splatoon I think he genuinely thought I was a fucking idiot because to his mind that idea was so ridiculous. This isn't a child or an ignorant parent btw, this is a grown man who's very good with his tech, almost lifelong gamer (especially Nintendo), and does more networking and tech shit than I'll ever do. I haven't brought the point up again since (at the time the website was still ambiguous) but I'll wait until it occurs and see what he thinks then. For me though, I am so burnt by their previous online implementations that until I have a thorough and solid understanding of it, I cannot commit to the cost of the console at RRP. A good deal may yet tempt me (as I'll translate savings into online and accessories probably) and I do really want the system - but I just cannot commit. I think we may see a drop in the rate of sales of Switch (though it will still continue to sell positively) once the online service launches fully. I just hope for Nintendo's sake it isn't anything that hits them too hard, because the Switch has a lot of interesting potential and things going for it compared to the WiiU. 19 hours ago, Ronnie said: Obviously I would prefer for online to be free forever, but I'm happy to pay £12 a year for it, in Nintendo's case at least. Online costs them (and Sony and Microsoft) money and given that video games themselves have never been cheaper, yet cost a ton to make, I don't see a problem with them trying to make a few extra quid to pay for the increased dev and infrastructure costs. Entitlement is one of my biggest gripes with the gaming community. The notion that gamers seem to think they deserve everything for nothing. I'm sure Nintendo will come up with enough added incentives to sign up, playing Super Mario Kart online with friends for instance. From where did you find the £12 figure? And can I ask what you will do if it's £12.01? or £13? £15? £20? Afaik there is no current information for the price in £, have you extrapolated from currency exchange and assumed it'll work like that? I think history has shown Nintendo do not particularly tend to take that approach.
Ronnie Posted February 20, 2018 Posted February 20, 2018 (edited) 23 minutes ago, Rummy said: it's ALSO imo stupid business sense to suddenly charge for a free service halfway through that I am pretty much 100% confident will get complaints from consumers who will say they did not realise this was going to happen and why did the game they could play for free yesterday suddenly become not free etcetc. I can't say I've got a sensible middle ground solution between both of these stupid ideas either. It's not a free service that's suddenly being charged for. It's a charged for service with a free trial, they've said this multiple times since January 2017. It's not ideal but it's not what you're quoting. 23 minutes ago, Rummy said: but when I said that one day he'll have to pay to play online for Splatoon I think he genuinely thought I was a fucking idiot because to his mind that idea was so ridiculous. Has he never heard of a PS3/360/PS4/XBO or a free trial then? I only ask because charging for online seems so alien to him. 23 minutes ago, Rummy said: From where did you find the £12 figure? I estimated based on conversion rates. I later estimated via the up to date Australia prices, which you didn't quote: 17 hours ago, Ronnie said: Nintendo charging £17 a year for online That's all we have to go on at the moment. Edited February 20, 2018 by Ronnie
Rummy Posted February 20, 2018 Posted February 20, 2018 19 hours ago, Ronnie said: People have mentioned the added perks Nintendo will be giving us, you just keep ignoring them. 'Will' is the future, and as you yourself have already acknowledged - Nintendo are being rather ambiguous in places which gives them great wiggle room. You cannot claim their ambiguity and certainty at the same time, surely? Quote We also don't know exactly what their virtual console like system will be, so it's pointless assessing the value before we know all the details. To me, paying a quid or so a month for online and virtual console is a good deal. They're a business. The are 10x more anti-consumer gaming companies out there. Don't look at it like paywalling old content. They've been very clear that MK8 online will be free for a limited time. Not the other way around. Games are 10x more expensive to make, and are being sold for less than they ever have. If you'd rather companies started selling every game for £70 and ditched DLC, microtransactions, season passes and paid-for online, then that's your call, but I suspect not many would agree with you. As I said, Nintendo have spent the past twelve months messaging that MK8 and other online games will be free for a limited time only. If they'd suddenly out of the blue decided to tell people they have to start paying for it, of course get upset, but they haven't. It was messaged from the very beginning. If it's pointless assessing the value before we know the details then why should any of us who are on the fence invest in a Switch? You do realise the actual contradictions to your own points that you're making that actually support those suggesting this is a bad business decision for them? You speak about to YOU which is, as has been said by quite a few, completely valid. Yet what about the people who AREN'T you? You can talk about them circulating information - do you really and truly believe every single Switch user or parent of a juvenile Switch user out there is aware of that information? I don't own a Switch myself - are they splashing this information up upon the Switch systems themselves? That's really the most appropriate place to be doing so if they haven't already, and if they are they should be CLEAR about it; not ambiguous. (forgive me for split messages, it isn't easy getting these written and edited together atm) 2 minutes ago, Ronnie said: It's not a free service that's suddenly being charged for. It's a charged for service with a free trial, they've said this multiple times since January 2017. It's not ideal but it's not what you're quoting. Has he never heard of a PS3/360/PS4/XBO or a free trial then? I only ask because charging for online seems so alien to him. I estimated based on conversion rates. I later estimated via the up to date Australia prices, which you didn't quote: That's all we have to go on at the moment. You say they've been messaging it clearly - so why doesn't my mate know? Does he know about free trials otherwise? Yes he does - but they're really clear at the point of signup and this guy is no damn idiot(though thank you for trying to attack him personally and paint him as such) - I already explained his expertise to you. He's very aware of software, licensing etc - yet the way Nintendo have presented this HAS NOT BEEN THE USUAL APPROACH AND THAT IS A PROBLEM. Don't bury your head in the sand - recognise their faults and think about what or why it is bad, recognise not everyone is you. Where did you find out about the fact it was a trial Ronnie? When did you buy your Switch? Did the system itself or its documentation tell you? I'm not asking my questions to be facetious either btw, I genuinely am asking because I want to know. I didn't quote Australian figures because I didn't have them to go on, nor would I use them in comparison to the current Euro approximation(which at current exchange is actually far closer to £17 than £12, let alone economic uncertainty with Brexit) - you're very fine to paint your figures to massage your points; but you seem to find it so difficult to be objective. Why present a self-estimate figure such as £12 as a fact, without even giving that disclaimer? Tell me how you feel when you go to the shop tomorrow and find everything to actually be 40% more expensive than you anticipate (in fact I've just seen Ike even do an AUS conversion coming in at £17 too which surely moots that silly argument as well?) 'That's all we have to go on at the moment' btw is exactly my point - it's ridiculous this system, a product, a retail item has been out for 18 months and we still don't actually know everything about what it's going to be. That's good business sense? That's good for Nintendo? That's beneficial? You genuinely believe it's good for them? Also there's a really big difference between charging for a service at the point of inception, and later introducing a charge retrospectively. I suspect you'll argue to say it isn't retrospective - but it is because it was not actually defined from the outset. Even still right now, at this moment in time, you can not tell me the entirety of this service and/or what it will entail. That means it surely will be retrospective, no? Actually gonna leave it there and catch up on the thread a bit more before further responses; didn't see how far back behind I was when I started.
Cube Posted February 20, 2018 Posted February 20, 2018 17 minutes ago, Rummy said: 'Will' is the future, and as you yourself have already acknowledged - Nintendo are being rather ambiguous in places which gives them great wiggle room. You cannot claim their ambiguity and certainty at the same time, surely? Nintendo aren't being that ambiguous. We know that there are the following perks - Deals on some games. - Access to three NES games which can be played online. More will be added in the future, although no details on how often it will be (if it will even be regular at all). And that's it. 1 2
Rummy Posted February 20, 2018 Posted February 20, 2018 10 minutes ago, Cube said: Nintendo aren't being that ambiguous. We know that there are the following perks - Deals on some games. - Access to three NES games which can be played online. More will be added in the future, although no details on how often it will be (if it will even be regular at all). And that's it. When I saw you were calling me on my shit I thought that was gonna be a decent dressing down on things I missed It's such a shame cos I want this thing for the price sorta tho probs lower but I too, kinda like the ones who argued about reward for loyalty, am just too burned by them. I don't believe I'm feeling entitled - as I happily pay for a service on an alternate system which I feel is value for money. If I'm not entitled there why would I be entitled here? It's simply just what's being offered and whether it is value for money for me. The problem is these relationships are so very rarely linear it can be difficult to think about - but the less appealing it is the more damage I believe it'll do in a sort of exponential decay sort of way. I still think on absolute numbers the Switch will do well but on relative comparisons it really will not look as good. 1
Ronnie Posted February 20, 2018 Posted February 20, 2018 Quote Will' is the future, and as you yourself have already acknowledged - Nintendo are being rather ambiguous in places which gives them great wiggle room. You cannot claim their ambiguity and certainty at the same time, surely? That wasn't the argument. Sheikah mentioned a lack of perks for signing up. I said Nintendo will be giving us some perks, as they've mentioned they would be. Simple. Quote If it's pointless assessing the value before we know the details then why should any of us who are on the fence invest in a Switch? Erm, I never said you did? Quote You speak about to YOU which is, as has been said by quite a few, completely valid. Yet what about the people who AREN'T you? I'm talking about Nintendo's messaging. Nothing to do with me. Does their messaging need to be very clear in the run up to the service launching? Absolutely, we'll see if it ends up being... Quote You say they've been messaging it clearly - so why doesn't my mate know? No idea. One person who may or may not be invested in the Switch ecosystem not knowing doesn't automatically mean their messaging isn't clear. Pretty much any time online has cropped up there's been a disclaimer saying free until such and such. I'm sure that'll increase as we get closer to September Quote And this guy is no damn idiot(though thank you for trying to attack him personally and paint him as such) You're putting words in my mouth again. I asked if he'd heard of PSN or Xbox Live as the concept of paying for online seemed crazy to him. Quote yet the way Nintendo have presented this HAS NOT BEEN THE USUAL APPROACH AND THAT IS A PROBLEM Capitals. Thank you very much for the condescending tone. God forbid Nintendo doesn't go with the usual approach. Not like they've based their entire history on doing just that. I've already said it's a problem their paid online isn't up and running on day one but how big a problem is it really to give their customers a year and a half of online for free. Come on. You're just looking for faults now. If Playstation 5 gave their users free online for that long people would be pleased. Quote That's all we have to go on at the moment' btw is exactly my point - it's ridiculous this system, a product, a retail item has been out for 18 months and we still don't actually know everything about what it's going to be. That's good business sense? That's good for Nintendo? That's beneficial? You genuinely believe it's good for them? You sound like all those detractors twelve months ago. Detractors who had said complaints evaporate away when they first held the thing. It's the fasting selling console in US history, I think you're overstating the problem and just looking for arguments now. Quote Why present a self-estimate figure such as £12 as a fact, without even giving that disclaimer? Because whether it's 12 quid, 15 quid or 17 quid the point is the same. Next time you present any estimations will you be posting a disclaimer each time? Quote in fact I've just seen Ike even do an AUS conversion coming in at £17 too which surely moots that silly argument as well?) Nope. If you'd read the whole thread before launching into all these arguments you'd have seen i quoted the updated £17 price tag as well.
Sheikah Posted February 20, 2018 Posted February 20, 2018 Capitals. Thank you very much for the condescending tone.God forbid Nintendo doesn't go with the usual approach. Not like they've based their entire history on doing just that. I've already said it's a problem their paid online isn't up and running on day one but how big a problem is it really to give their customers a year and a half of online for free. Come on. You're just looking for faults now. If Playstation 5 gave their users free online for that long people would be pleased.There is something incredibly antagonistic about the bolded part of your post, as if Reggie couldn't have tried to explain it better than that if he tried. They haven't been giving it away "for free" as a kind "demo" as you paint it - it simply hasn't been ready to give in any other way, which is a fault and not a plus. For the console to launch without very basic features present in the (now old) Xbox 360 is bad, not something to be spun into a positive. So long as you spin like that you will run into these challenges. I'm not sure you're always aware you're doing it. And to then make a like-for-like comparison to giving PSN away for free for 18 months...come on. PSN is a feature-rich and established service, whereas what we have now with Switch isn't worth a penny. The reason they haven't charged for what they're giving us right now on Switch is because it's bollocks.
Ronnie Posted February 20, 2018 Posted February 20, 2018 18 minutes ago, Sheikah said: There is something incredibly antagonistic about the bolded part of your post, as if Reggie couldn't have tried to explain it better than that if he tried. They haven't been giving it away "for free" as a kind "demo" as you paint it - it simply hasn't been ready to give in any other way, which is a fault and not a plus. For the console to launch without very basic features present in the (now old) Xbox 360 is bad, not something to be spun into a positive. So long as you spin like that you will run into these challenges. I'm not sure you're always aware you're doing it. And to then make a like-for-like comparison to giving PSN away for free for 18 months...come on. PSN is a feature-rich and established service, whereas what we have now with Switch isn't worth a penny. The reason they haven't charged for what they're giving us right now on Switch is because it's bollocks. There's nothing antagonistic about the bolded part. Nothing. If you want to point out antagonist parts of people's posts, check out most of Rummy's CAPITALISED comments. Why not mention those? Rummy suggested the fact that we're having to pay for online after an 18 month delay was a "problem". I was merely questioning how big a problem that was, in reality. Is it ideal that the Switch online infrastructure is currently barebones, not at all, it's a big issue for those who are into that kind of thing. I've never suggested it wasn't. Is it a problem that we have to wait before parting with money, no, it isn't.
drahkon Posted February 20, 2018 Posted February 20, 2018 Can someone clean this thread up please? It's kind of annoying when you have to scroll and search for the sensible posts about this topic. 1 2
DazzeL Posted February 20, 2018 Posted February 20, 2018 There are some balanced posts in here - overall the Switch is a great console but Nintendo still deserve criticism in several areas. I think the link between sales of the console and charging for online is too early to tell. The system undoubtably currently loses sales because of the lack of voice chat, cloud saves and general online features. If the online service includes those things then at the likely price point of around £20 per year I think it will boost console sales. If it’s just a few NES games and continued access to barebones online then, yes, I agree we could see some deterioration in the sales curve as casual gamers are put off and the sceptical core gamers fears are confirmed. I think there were some stats a while ago about the 20-30 male being the main buyers - suggests current success is really down to core gamers so I think momentum in this space is probably more important than any ‘blue ocean’ Wii type play in an age of iPads and smart phones that mostly fill that gap.
Rummy Posted February 21, 2018 Posted February 21, 2018 Apologies if the capitals offended you @Ronnie, as stated in the post I was cutting together many little bits and for that one I used capitals in place of bold because it wasn't bolding properly. My point with it not being usual is - and I think you willfully choose to ignore this - is it hasn't been done anything like Xbox or PSN's online. Where else has given an undefined limited free trial that has gone on for this long with such little detail about the service both at the outset/inception and still uncertainty so now(also highlighted by Goron's point of shifting estimates for delivery of said service). As for the rest of it you come across wilfully factitious for the sake of arguing and cherry picking points to take an argument in another direction because it seems you struggle to argue reasonably and rationally against the points(made also and probably best by Julius Caesar in the last few pages). I see little point responding to most of those points because it seems a fruitless excercise; I don't think you're truly here to discuss and grow in sensible debates, rather to argue to the death Nintendo's faultlessness. In addition, nobody has answered my question yet - is the messaging being pushed through the actual switch console and system, and if not why not? Surely that is the most important and sensible avenue for it? Are they doing it? It has notifications no, is it regularly notifying users of the changes coming? 1
Ronnie Posted February 21, 2018 Posted February 21, 2018 1 hour ago, Rummy said: My point with it not being usual is - and I think you willfully choose to ignore this - is it hasn't been done anything like Xbox or PSN's online. Where else has given an undefined limited free trial that has gone on for this long with such little detail about the service both at the outset/inception and still uncertainty so now(also highlighted by Goron's point of shifting estimates for delivery of said service). I haven't ignored it, I've commented on it many times. You're absolutely right, this method has never been done before. My point is... what's the big deal? Why do you paint this as a bad thing, a company doing something that's never been done before? I'm sure Nintendo would have loved to have their online service up and running for the release of the Switch, but they haven't managed it. A shame, but I'm not going to cry about a delay to paying for online. Maybe they could have released a half arsed version of it and asked people to pay (see: many publishers releasing half broken games early), but as usual they chose to delay and get it right before release. Quote As for the rest of it you come across wilfully factitious for the sake of arguing and cherry picking points to take an argument in another direction because it seems you struggle to argue reasonably and rationally against the points(made also and probably best by Julius Caesar in the last few pages). I see little point responding to most of those points because it seems a fruitless excercise; I don't think you're truly here to discuss and grow in sensible debates, rather to argue to the death Nintendo's faultlessness. Funny, I was thinking the same about you, especially the part about factitious arguing for the sake of arguing. Drumming up a conversation that had been finished and picking holes before even reading the whole exchange. The above quote a perfect example. Arguing with you is like arguing with a brick wall. So yes, let's drop it.
Londragon Posted February 21, 2018 Posted February 21, 2018 1 hour ago, Rummy said: In addition, nobody has answered my question yet - is the messaging being pushed through the actual switch console and system, and if not why not? Surely that is the most important and sensible avenue for it? Are they doing it? It has notifications no, is it regularly notifying users of the changes coming? The messaging is not being pushed through the console in a systematic way. From memory we've received a news channel message, upon start-up of the Switch, stating what Nintendo said during the pre-release Direct. Nothing since. However, every game, purchased in the eShop or Retail, has a disclaimer on the back of the box stating that ambiguous notion I quoted earlier in the thread. But, it's there on every online enabled game I have so far, stating there is a free trial for online features until the inception of the paid service. Looking at the back of the Resident Rev's box (I got the US version) it says "Nintendo Account and paid subscription may be required for some network services and features, including online gaming. Not available in all countries. Visit Nintendo.com/switch-online." 3
Kav Posted February 21, 2018 Posted February 21, 2018 I see people’s points, it hasn’t been done like this before and may cause confusion for a lot of people, but generally I agree with @Ronnie on this as Nintendo have stated that it’s free until they get the full service up and running. Where it gets a bit grey for me is that we have no idea what the full service will be like... can we really say that Nintendo will “get it right” given their track record with online..?! I’m not so sure. For it to cause minimal problems it has to offer something distinguishably different to how it currently is... it needs to show it warrants a price! Cloud saves and the Chat Service to be tied to the OS so it’s not game specific is needed for me. 1
Hero-of-Time Posted February 21, 2018 Posted February 21, 2018 It's a very strange situation but i'd rather they take their time and get it right, rather than have it rushed and still trying to fix or work things out. I know there were rumours that they were having problems getting the service right, which is why there has been such a delay, but I also wonder if the success of the console has impacted their schedule. Their hand hasn't been forced due to how well the Switch has sold and it may have given them the time they need to get things right. Had the console failed out of the gate then I imagine they would have launched the service earlier, whether it was fully ready or not. 4
Emerald Emblem Posted February 21, 2018 Posted February 21, 2018 The big factor is going to be if the servers show considerable improvement when the full service is put into effect, whatever else is offered is superficial if you still have the same server connectivity issues that is currently provided for free. People will not pay for it. 1
Sheikah Posted February 21, 2018 Posted February 21, 2018 1 minute ago, Hero-of-Time said: It's a very strange situation but i'd rather they take their time and get it right, rather than have it rushed and still trying to fix or work things out. I know there were rumours that they were having problems getting the service right, which is why there has been such a delay, but I also wonder if the success of the console has impacted their schedule. Their hand hasn't been forced due to how well the Switch has sold and it may have given them the time they need to get things right. Had the console failed out of the gate then I imagine they would have launched the service earlier, whether it was fully ready or not. I think that's a good point, and something I agree with. And also part of the problem - their ambiguous language (which they continue to use) is most likely deliberate to allow for them to adapt as needed. What this means though is that people don't actually know if Mario Kart, for instance, will remain free to play or not. It would have been better if they had set a firm date up front and said exactly what would be covered and offered by the service. 280 quid is a lot to ask without divulging how good an online service the system will have. 1
Ronnie Posted February 21, 2018 Posted February 21, 2018 (edited) @Kav I'm honoured! Good post though. Cloud saves should have been in from the start, so surely it'll be in their online plan. I'm hoping for a good selection of VC games, how they implement online into old SNES games will be very interesting. 12 minutes ago, Hero-of-Time said: It's a very strange situation but i'd rather they take their time and get it right, rather than have it rushed and still trying to fix or work things out. I know there were rumours that they were having problems getting the service right, which is why there has been such a delay, but I also wonder if the success of the console has impacted their schedule. Their hand hasn't been forced due to how well the Switch has sold and it may have given them the time they need to get things right. Had the console failed out of the gate then I imagine they would have launched the service earlier, whether it was fully ready or not. Agree with this, and I think the success of the Switch and how many devs are putting their games on it has slowed down their virtual console plans as well. At first I was really disappointed there wasn't any classic games out but I still have about 15-20 games on Switch I need to get through. Edited February 21, 2018 by Ronnie 1 1
Hero-of-Time Posted February 21, 2018 Posted February 21, 2018 5 minutes ago, Ronnie said: Agree with this, and I think the success of the Switch and how many devs are putting their games on it has slowed down their virtual console plans as well. At first I was really disappointed there wasn't any classic games out but I still have about 15-20 games on Switch I need to get through. I think the lack of Virtual Console has been one of the best things for console, as seen by my RANT last year. It's allowed the indie developers to be seen and it has shaped the Switch as the place to play a lot of their games. The success stories from these developers,who have originally struggled on other platforms, is a big boost for the Switch and Nintendo. I think it's got a lot of other developers taking notice and has shown a lot people who usually snub such games just how amazing these smaller titles can be. 2 1
Rummy Posted February 21, 2018 Posted February 21, 2018 7 hours ago, Ronnie said: Funny, I was thinking the same about you, especially the part about factitious arguing for the sake of arguing. Funnily enough, my phone autocorrected the word 'facetiously' yet considering your response has requoted the incorrect word I must wonder whether you've actually just rather well but unintentionally illustrated my point perfectly. 6 hours ago, Hero-of-Time said: It's a very strange situation but i'd rather they take their time and get it right, rather than have it rushed and still trying to fix or work things out. I know there were rumours that they were having problems getting the service right, which is why there has been such a delay, but I also wonder if the success of the console has impacted their schedule. Their hand hasn't been forced due to how well the Switch has sold and it may have given them the time they need to get things right. Had the console failed out of the gate then I imagine they would have launched the service earlier, whether it was fully ready or not. I want them to get it right as well; the problem I see is that the more I look at this - from the most likely points of view - I can only see notable trouble. In the grand scheme of things in a business sense it won't kill them, but it's not going to necessarily do any further favours for their brand amongst certain groups.
Recommended Posts