Nintendo Switch Online + Expansion Pack: N64 & SEGA Mega Drive (& GBA!!)

[Sheikah]

No but if they offered Snowboard Kids and Beetle Adventure Racing...

And as a side point about who is watching 480p Netflix; nearly 30,000 are still using black and white TVs in the UK so you never know. Some people live in the past!

I mean yeah, there is that. Pretty silly to say that 99.9% of customers subscribe to the higher tiers when there's no evidence of that.

What does this mean? "sales of games on PS4"? What kind of argument is that without data to back it up?

You mean like your "99.9%" figure yeah? Where's the data Ronnie?

Anyway there is plenty of evidence that Sony's first party exclusives sell very well (data are available online). They are selling very well in spite of them including monthly games in the Plus subscription. If all people did was play the Plus games then they wouldn't be buying software. Many people have big backlogs (even by virtue of simply being subscribed to Plus) but still buy games they want when they release.

[Ashley]

Although to try and move the conversation on a little; how much do people expect the expansion pack will cost? And how much do you want it to cost (if different). 

[S.C.G]

3 minutes ago, Ashley said:

Although to try and move the conversation on a little; how much do people expect the expansion pack will cost? And how much do you want it to cost (if different). 

How much I would want it to cost... £22.99 per year. (£5 more than the current subscription)

How much do I expect the expansion pack will cost... £27.99 per year. (£10 more than the current subscription)

Regarding the whole subscription cost element, it's not that much for what it offers, it's the only thing which I subscribe to personally as it seemed to be a reasonable price, and I don't even really make that much use out of it any more, I'll probably keep it though, so I have the option of playing online, but at the moment? My original GameCube gets played online more than the Switch.

Depending on how much extra it is... I might put off renewing it, though it will still run until the start of next year, I believe? Though that won't help me if I do want to play N64 and MegaDrive games, as that will cost extra, and being that the extra cost is for the expansion pack, if I was to buy into it when it launches... wouldn't there be an overlap? As in, the original subscription would lapse before the expansion pack will, does that mean that I'd only have access to N64 and MD games? I wonder if that has been taken into consideration.

- - - - -

While it is nice that Nintendo are putting N64 games on the Nintendo Switch Online service, there are plenty of ways in which N64 games can be played, though the clear selling point here is that you can play these games on the Switch, with the option of buying an official controller, or play the games in portable mode, plus the online multiplayer for... four of the launch titles.

It will be good if you can at least opt to choose which region games you want to play this time, which is what seems to be implied with the latest information. Because if not... then well, the option would be playing The Legend of Zelda: Majora's Mask in 50Hz in 2021? When there is a fan-made high-resolution texture pack which recently launched, combine that with the USA version of the game, (which you'd already own, of course) with options to improve the game, and a way to use a real N64 controller on a PC...

I know which option I'd be likely to choose. Granted, it's not on original hardware, but neither is this, though really, this probably isn't aimed at anyone who really wants to play N64 games in the best possible way. The emulation for these games on NSO has been really good so far though, and whichever method you choose, it'll never be perfect. When it comes to Majora's Mask, I'll always take the N64 version over the 3DS remake any day, as the changes to some of the original gameplay elements made it not worth finishing the game (to me) at the time, despite the various improvements; so another way to play this game, is more than fine by me, and it will give players who never got to experience the original, another option.

Is anyone genuinely excited to play any of these N64 and MD games on the Switch? I can see Banjo-Kazooie being popular for the novelty of having a Rare game on a Nintendo console again, and to have Paper Mario in portable form is nice, but beyond that? Online multiplayer on Mario Kart 64 perhaps? Most of the Mega Drive games have been made available in fully purchaseable form, in larger collections, with online multiplayer, plus one such option already exists on the Switch... but again, it's good to have options.

As for the controllers... it would be interesting if there was a Raphnet style adapter for converting GameCube controller input to N64, as then, theoretically, you could use a real N64 controller with the Switch, using the GC USB adapter. Though I suppose the third-party Brawler 64 pad with USB is probably an easier option. Just that the official N64 pad for the Switch is bound to be around £30 - £40 I'd have thought?

Anyway, retro games... subscriptions... controllers... it's nice to have a choice.

[Dcubed]

6 hours ago, Helmsly said:

 

See Nintendo? It really wasn’t that hard.

Fantastic news!  

[Julius]

1 hour ago, Ashley said:

how much do people expect the expansion pack will cost? And how much do you want it to cost (if different). 

Current subscription prices:

1 month - £3.49

3 months - £6.99

12 months - £17.99

Family plan - £31.49

My guesses for the Expansion Pack tier:

1 month - £4.99 (+43%)

3 months - £9.99 (+43%)

12 months - £24.99 (+39%)

Family plan - £39.99 (+27%)

The only real rhyme or reason to my thinking is that it takes them to nice round numbers which give the illusion of not being too much of a bump, when they're actually fairly substantial. There's a chance it could be more, but then I do think you get into the territory of people comparing Xbox Live and PlayStation Plus to this more closely, which is why I think it'd be a bit risky to charge over £40 for any of their subscriptions at any tier, even if the family plan is (on paper) a terrific deal. I also have a sneaking suspicion - which could be waaaaaaay off - that the family plan is their most popular plan, but also isn't fully utilised (how many people are actually using the maximum 8 accounts?), which is another reason I could see them wanting to keep it from getting too high. 

Plus, if they plan on keeping this service around for the long haul and a potential Switch successor, along with adding more legacy platform titles at a later date, I think it'd be smart for them to keep the ceiling low so that they still have some wiggle room to pump it up some more in the future. I can see an annual family plan going for £49.99 when they add a Handheld Expansion with Game Boy titles followed later by Game Boy Advance titles, and then £59.99 when they add GameCube titles (...and maybe Dreamcast? Though this year it might be down to it being SEGA's anniversary I guess).

It could get a bit complex to follow at that point for an impulse buy, but then again, that kind of is what the subscription model is all about: getting you locked into a subscription and maybe hoping you forget it's set to auto-renew. Depending on how many more consoles are added by the time we get to the Switch successor, I could see them streamlining things and removing the lowest tier. 

36 minutes ago, S.C.G said:

Depending on how much extra it is... I might put off renewing it, though it will still run until the start of next year, I believe? Though that won't help me if I do want to play N64 and MegaDrive games, as that will cost extra, and being that the extra cost is for the expansion pack, if I was to buy into it when it launches... wouldn't there be an overlap? As in, the original subscription would lapse before the expansion pack will, does that mean that I'd only have access to N64 and MD games? I wonder if that has been taken into consideration.

From the Direct:

I'd hope it's as simply as a flat upgrade fee, depending on how many months you have left of your current subscription. My family plan subscription only renewed last month, so fingers crossed!

But, this is Nintendo. What we're more realistically looking at for those with existing memberships to change over to the new membership is something like this:

Edited October 11, 2021 by Julius

[Ronnie]

1 hour ago, Sheikah said:

I mean yeah, there is that. Pretty silly to say that 99.9% of customers subscribe to the higher tiers when there's no evidence of that.

You mean like your "99.9%" figure yeah? Where's the data Ronnie?

Anyway there is plenty of evidence that Sony's first party exclusives sell very well (data are available online). They are selling very well in spite of them including monthly games in the Plus subscription. If all people did was play the Plus games then they wouldn't be buying software. Many people have big backlogs (even by virtue of simply being subscribed to Plus) but still buy games they want when they release.

It's not a stretch to say that the vast majority of Netflix subscriptions aren't watching at 480p in 2021. 

You just said "PS4 games sell", to prove that Plus doesn't stop sales. You've no idea how much those free games (all, what, 2 or 3 of them a month?) impact on full software sales. Shouldn't you be saying that Sony should be giving us 50 free games a month, that would increase subscriber counts according to you wouldn't it?

[Sheikah]

It's not a stretch to say that the vast majority of Netflix subscriptions aren't watching at 480p in 2021. 

You just said "PS4 games sell", to prove that Plus doesn't stop sales. You've no idea how much those free games (all, what, 2 or 3 of them a month?) impact on full software sales. Shouldn't you be saying that Sony should be giving us 50 free games a month, that would increase subscriber counts according to you wouldn't it?

But 99.9%? That's crazy, whichever way you spin it. Again, your question back at you - where's the data to back your hunch up? Where is any data to support the fact the £6 sub isn't the most popular option? I wouldn't be surprised if the cheaper option was the most popular. A lot of people aren't bothered about HD, but do want to pay less.

And if we're going to compare subs it makes more sense to compare Nintendo's low frills offering (which actually has no tiers) to the £6 sub. The higher tier Netflix subs, as well as being higher resolution, also let you play on multiple devices simultaneously. That's not something Nintendo let you do with NSO and VC games, as far as I know.

My point about Sony's games is they still sell several million, in line or higher than many games on other systems, despite the fact people get 3 games to play a month via Plus. If people had no time to play other games due to the Plus games then you wouldn't see Sony's games selling like that.

Are you really telling me that Nintendo would be worried about releasing all their SNES games for fear people wouldn't buy the next big Mario game. That's just not how things work. People will get excited for the release of the next new Mario game, it's not like they'll think "nah why bother, I now have Mario All Stars on my subscription".

Was there a noticeable dip in Switch software sales when Nintendo dumped a bunch of classic games on its NSO subscription? I think not.

[Ronnie]

2 minutes ago, Sheikah said:

And if we're going to compare subs it makes more sense to compare Nintendo's low frills offering (which actually has no tiers) to the £6 sub. The higher tier Netflix subs, as well as being higher resolution, also let you play on multiple devices simultaneously. That's not something Nintendo let you do with NSO and VC games, as far as I know.

I don't even know why we're comparing them in the first place. One is the entire all in one product, the other is multiple bits of added functionality onto pre-existing hardware and software. Comparing Game Pass with Netflix sure, I could see that.

5 minutes ago, Sheikah said:

My point about Sony's games is they still sell several million, in line or higher than many games on other systems, despite the fact people get 3 games to play a month via Plus. If people had no time to play other games due to the Plus games then you wouldn't see Sony's games selling like that.

Oh please. They sell several million, on an install-base of nearly 100 million, sure. Who's to say they couldn't sell even more without Plus. But anyway, it's only 3 games a month. Maybe Sony realised that giving away more than 3 would eat into their software sales? Basically the point I'm trying to make.

7 minutes ago, Sheikah said:

Are you really telling me that Nintendo would be worried about releasing all their SNES games for fear people wouldn't buy the next big Mario game. That's just not how things work. People will get excited for the release of the next new Mario game, it's not like they'll think "nah why bother, I now have Mario All Stars on my subscription".

Sure, you can pick literally the highest profile Nintendo game ever, but how about something smaller like WarioWare or Advance Wars Remake? If someone is getting their fill of 50-100 N64 games.

At the end of the day, there is a reason why they do what they do. Many industry insiders around the Switch launch talked about how Nintendo want their players playing new games, not old ones. It's just basic business sense.

[Sheikah]

1 minute ago, Ronnie said:

I don't even know why we're comparing them in the first place. One is the entire all in one product, the other is multiple bits of added functionality onto pre-existing hardware and software. Comparing Game Pass with Netflix sure, I could see that.

I'm comparing them because they both cost money, and they're both subscription services. Nine N64 games on a subscription model is not good. And I brought Netflix and Game Pass in to this discussion to make a clear point - if there were only 9 TV shows on Netflix, or only 9 games on Game Pass, people would quite rightly call those poor offerings.

We will wait for a price from Nintendo (perhaps it starts out ultra cheap) but unless it's very cheap then it's hard for me to see this as good value.

1 minute ago, Ronnie said:

Oh please. They sell several million, on an install-base of nearly 100 million, sure. Who's to say they couldn't sell even more without Plus. But anyway, it's only 3 games a month. Maybe Sony realised that giving away more than 3 would eat into their software sales? Basically the point I'm trying to make.

The problem is that the point you're actually trying to make doesn't make any sense. It's the kind of shoestring conclusion you might see somebody scrawl onto a beer mat after a long drinking session.

Sony already have PlayStation Now, a subscription service which has over 800 games on it. By your reckoning, the very existence of this service would mean new software sales would be so severely impacted that any profit from PlayStation Now subs would be cancelled out by the loss of new game sales. Which obviously doesn't happen, because PlayStation Now continues to exist, and PS4/5 games continue to sell well. 

1 minute ago, Ronnie said:

Sure, you can pick literally the highest profile Nintendo game ever, but how about something smaller like WarioWare or Advance Wars Remake? If someone is getting their fill of 50-100 N64 games.

We can't continue to entertain this fiction any longer. There's no reason to believe what you're suggesting actually happens or would happen.

1 minute ago, Ronnie said:

At the end of the day, there is a reason why they do what they do. Many industry insiders around the Switch launch talked about how Nintendo want their players playing new games, not old ones. It's just basic business sense.

If they wanted their customers to play new games they wouldn't be releasing N64 games and charging a sub for it. It's as simple as that.

[Ronnie]

2 minutes ago, Sheikah said:

Nine N64 games on a subscription model is not good

And yet, you're the only one on this board complaining about the number. And also, you don't know how much they're charging extra, we could go from £1.50 per month to £1.80 a month.

4 minutes ago, Sheikah said:

if there were only 9 TV shows on Netflix, or only 9 games on Game Pass, people would quite rightly call those poor offerings.

Netflix is a standalone product. NSO isn't.

5 minutes ago, Sheikah said:

It's the kind of shoestring conclusion you might see somebody scrawl onto a beer mat after a long drinking session.

Ok, we're done here I think 

[Sheikah]

And yet, you're the only one on this board complaining about the number. And also, you don't know how much they're charging extra, we could go from £1.50 per month to £1.80 a month.

I mean, it doesn't really matter how many people are saying it on this board, does it? I'm struggling to see what point you're making here other than point scoring?

Netflix is a standalone product. NSO isn't.

I don't understand what you're trying to say here.

Nintendo will charge an amount of (as yet undisclosed) money to play these N64 and mega drive VC games. That's an amount of money that gets you access to these games and nothing else - it's the difference between the NSO and NSO+ cost. Netflix will similarly charge you an amount of money to access some content, too.

[Ashley]

Personally yeah 9 is a bit low for launch for this kind of thing and I could deal with that if we knew it was the start of a steady stream but other than the ones coming later they've already announced I am doubtful we'll get any more on this service. I'd honestly be surprised if we get up to 20 by the time the console is replaced, which would be 5% of the console's total games.

[Josh64]

22 hours ago, Sheikah said:

I disagree, if they're emulating the games and they've had years to do this they should really have a lot more than that to begin with - in fact I think they should have most games on there. If they want to get people to pay a subscription for it then they should really be looking to make it as attractive as possible. Right now it feels like a bit of a cash grab to get their most loyal fans subscribed over a long period of time to get the drip feed of content. I remember on past consoles they would release a few VC games every week over years.

I actually think paying more for this as well isn't great, Switch online might be around half the price of the others but it's missing very fundamental features like voice chat and messaging. Having these games included in the basic subscription price would have sweetened the deal in what is otherwise a very limited offering. As it stands right now I see very little reason to subscribe to this extra service, especially as I've already got Mario from the anniversary edition.

I am very unsociable when it comes to gaming so the Switch is a godsend as there is no way of getting in touch with me or trying to coerce me into group voice chats which is often the case when I occasionally fire up my xbox - however I am sure that I'm in the 1% of people that feel this way, almost everyone is shocked/disappointed when they learn about just how barebones Switch online is so a price increase really is baffling. Even forgetting the lack of features there, I think this should have no price increase simply because their NES/SNES output has been pretty shit /non-existent the past year or so, so the addition of these consoles should just be seen as a necessity to continue the promise of bi-monthly retro games and not an extra. 

 

19 hours ago, Ashley said:

No but if they offered Snowboard Kids and Beetle Adventure Racing...

And as a side point about who is watching 480p Netflix; nearly 30,000 are still using black and white TVs in the UK so you never know. Some people live in the past!

Oh you and your love of Beetle Adventure Racing  I remember as a wee kid playing DKC2 on the 'extra TV' in my parents room, this tiny black and white thing. There's a level where the water turns red after a while at which point you must jump out to avoid death, this was so much easier when I was finally blessed with a beautiful colour CRT the following Christmas. 

 

19 hours ago, Ronnie said:

On Nintendo Switch Online. The negatives would outweigh the marginal increase. No one is waiting for Destruction Derby 64 or Pilotwings 64 to suddenly sign up.

Speak for yourself, Pilotwings 64 is a classic! 

 

 

 

Slightly related - An old friend from college that hasn't been into gaming since his childhood days on N64 got a Switch recently and has been talking to me all things related to it. He excitedly asked me if the upcoming N64 Switch Online might include Goldeneye. Oh my sweet summer child. 

[Ashley]

Beetle Adventure Racing is the best racing game on the console BAR none. 

[Glen-i]

1 hour ago, Ashley said:

Beetle Adventure Racing is the best racing game on the console BAR none. 

I've always wanted to try that game. Because, y'know, if it can stand up to Diddy Kong Racing, then it must be great!

Edited October 12, 2021 by Glen-i

[Happenstance]

Looking at the list of N64 racers I just think me and my friends must have skipped over the console when it came to those. We tried most of the big ones but not one seemed to have stuck and gone into our gaming rotation.

[Glen-i]

2 minutes ago, Happenstance said:

Looking at the list of N64 racers I just think me and my friends must have skipped over the console when it came to those. We tried most of the big ones but not one seemed to have stuck and gone into our gaming rotation.

It's because Mario Kart 64 is kinda mediocre.

[Happenstance]

1 minute ago, Glen-i said:

It's because Mario Kart 64 is kinda mediocre.

I've never really been a fan of any Mario Kart games to be honest. My kart games of choice back then were Speed Freaks and Street Racer.

[Sheikah]

13 minutes ago, Glen-i said:

It's because Mario Kart 64 is kinda mediocre.

I agree with you, the length of the tracks as well as the perceived speed of the karts felt all wrong.

[Cube]

Mario Kart 64 is great in 4 player as it often glitches and runs much faster.

[Ashley]

1 hour ago, Glen-i said:

I've always wanted to try that game. Because, y'know, if it can stand up to Diddy Kong Racing, then it must be great!

I actually forgot that was on the N64...

But we seem to all agree MK64 was fine but not the best racer on the console and certainly not the best MK offering.

[Sméagol]

Am I the only one who really enjoyed MK64 then? I'd pick it over SNES MK, MKDD, and Diddy Kong Racing. In fact, I'd choose having no game over playing MKDD or Diddy Kong Racing. 4 player MK64 sessions were definitely one of the highlights back then.

That said, I'm not really into racing in general, so I haven't played most other arcade racers, and I'm interested in trying those, like Beetle Adventure Racing and Ridge racer.

The other one I really liked was Extreme G, and yes I'd pick that up over FZero 64.

I seem to have an unusual taste in racers.

Edited October 12, 2021 by Sméagol

[Emerald Emblem]

The funny thing to me, is that people have said they would pay more for NSO if it had N64 games included. Now people are complaining they will have to pay more for N64 games. People who have been playing Nintendo consoles for a long time will already know how Nintendo's business model works, as has been said, conditioned to expect this. If people do not support it, they may rethink it, but as I said earlier, conditioned to expect this much.

Edited October 12, 2021 by Emerald Emblem

[Cube]

I definitely enjoyed MK64 at the time, but don't see much reason to play it again. Still far better than MK Wii.

 

[Glen-i]

16 minutes ago, Sméagol said:

Am I the only one who really enjoyed MK64 then? I'd pick it over SNES MK, MKDD, and Diddy Kong Racing. In fact, I'd choose having no game over playing MKDD or Diddy Kong Racing. 4 player MK64 sessions were definitely one of the highlights back then.

Taken on it's own, it's fine, but every Mario Kart since has only served to make 64's flaws more apparent.

The character balance is just flat out borked in favour of Yoshi, Toad, and Peach. They accelerate faster, their top speed is the best and they turn the easiest as well. There really is no real reason to choose anyone else. (Well, they get shunted the most by heavy characters, but no-one's gonna catch you anyway, so...) You know when Toad shouts "I'm the best!" He's not lying. Playing with three other people and they choose the golden 3 first? Sucks to be you, then.

The items are woefully useless. The Red Shell requires you to be right up the backside of the person in front, and even then, it's not a sure thing. You can hit a banana and as long as you're driving straight, you just tap B and it does nothing.

Screen cheating makes tracks with jumps that cross over lower sections like Wario Stadium devolve into a stalemate when someone inevitably gets a Lightning and no-one dares cross the jump, because everyone knows what's gonna happen. On the other extreme, tracks like Wario Stadium (again) and Rainbow Road force you to have a gentleman's agreement that certain unintended shortcuts are banned, otherwise you're not really racing on the track at all.

Really, if you want a racing game with item shenanigans, just play Diddy Kong Racing. It's just a better designed and balanced game. As long as people don't realise how to break more then half of the tracks with the Car.

Mario Kart 64's only redeeming quality is Battle Mode, which is surprisingly good for 4-player shenanigans.