• Register
  • TOS
  • Privacy
  • @NeoGAF
  • Like

FirmBizBws
Becomes baffled, curling up into a ball when confronted with three controller options.
(11-23-2017, 04:57 AM)
FirmBizBws's Avatar
What has Nintendo done to justify the $30 per year for the online service that is supposed to be implemented sometime in 2018? Just Splatoon? NBA 2k18? Has Nintendo added any game or any feature that makes itís online service a must subscribe in 2018?

For me personally, I just have splatoon, and I donít play it enough to justify paying half the price of that one game, each year, just to keep playing it. And I donít think Nintendo has anything on its platform that we can sit back and understand as a justification for paying an online fee. What do you think? Are you going to pay the yearly price just to play splatoon or have you found other reasons to pay the fee?
goldenpp72
Member
(11-23-2017, 05:01 AM)
goldenpp72's Avatar
I thought it was 20 dollars?
Smasher89
Member
(11-23-2017, 05:02 AM)
No and they still havent mentioned which "3rd party companies" that pushed them towards that model, would like to know what to boycott.
IslanderFanatic
Junior Member
(11-23-2017, 05:03 AM)
for me, nothing. Every game that comes out that I wish had online multiplayer is only couch co-op and such.
Spauldingxx
Member
(11-23-2017, 05:04 AM)
Iíll wait and see how the free rotating virtual console games works.
Meesh
Member
(11-23-2017, 05:15 AM)
Meesh's Avatar
No. And thanks for the reminder... might have to decide whether XX is worth the yearly sub.
Ubername
Member
(11-23-2017, 05:19 AM)
Ubername's Avatar
They'll do many thing to piss you off and give you scraps. Who cares, they mandate a surcharge so paid they will be. It's not like you can vote about this sort of thing lol.
Hinedorf
Junior Member
(11-23-2017, 05:21 AM)
Hinedorf's Avatar
I've played 40 hours of Splatoon 2, 40 hours of mario kart, 5 hours of Arms and loved every minute. If the online charge was in place in the beginning, I'd have paid for it and I will pay for it next year.

When I look at how much time I've invested into online gaming with Nintendo, I feel I already owe them for what great fun I got in the first year.

Put this in perspective with a 60$ game like For Honor by Ubisoft which dc'd 50% of the time. If Nintendo is charging me 20/30$ for the already great online gaming services they've provided it's better than most companies will EVER come up with.
J4K
Junior Member
(11-23-2017, 05:23 AM)
It better include some Netflix style access to their retro games catalog.

To this point they've somehow managed to regress in terms of what they offer for online play vs other systems.
pretty done
Member
(11-23-2017, 05:25 AM)
pretty done's Avatar

Originally Posted by Meesh

No. And thanks for the reminder... might have to decide whether XX is worth the yearly sub.

In a way I'm glad it's not getting localized so I don't have to pay for Nintendo's online. My experience with Mario Kart was just disconnects, then re-joining and waiting for a race to be over, only to disconnect again before the next race started. Wifi is so trash for gaming.
Adam_802
Member
(11-23-2017, 05:31 AM)
nintendo is still far behind in many ways, including online.
Petrae
Member
(11-23-2017, 05:45 AM)
Petrae's Avatar
Nothing, really. Itís a ďMe too!Ē response, since Microsoft and Sony are cleaning up with their online sub fees. Nintendo gains nothing by not charging for online play, given that consumers have proven that they are more than willing to pay for the privilege.
TheSpecialOne
Member
(11-23-2017, 05:48 AM)
TheSpecialOne's Avatar
The answer is nothing, absolutely nothing. When Nintendo start charging for online, I'll stop playing online on the switch. Until they actually deliver features worth paying for, its going to be a hard pass from me.
Louis Cyphre
Junior Member
(11-23-2017, 05:49 AM)
Louis Cyphre's Avatar
In this day and age you don't need to justify anything as long as there is no alternative.
Valdega
Junior Member
(11-23-2017, 05:53 AM)

Originally Posted by Louis Cyphre

In this day and age you don't need to justify anything as long as there is no alternative.

This. MS did nothing to justify the Xbox Live Gold subscription fee when they first introduced it. Same with PSN when they followed suit. Platform owners charge for multiplayer because they can, not because they've actually done anything to justify it. As long as customers keep paying for it, companies will keep doing it.
Bucket-o-roadkill
Member
(11-23-2017, 05:59 AM)
Bucket-o-roadkill's Avatar
I suspect for many it will be a subscription for smash bros online and not much more
Nikana
Member
(11-23-2017, 06:29 AM)
Nikana's Avatar
I still don't think they can get away with charging to play online for games like Splatoon and Mario kart suddenly one day. Maybe I'm wrong but I feel like they would piss of casual players.
batrush
Member
(11-23-2017, 06:33 AM)
batrush's Avatar
Absolutely jack.
synce
Member
(11-23-2017, 06:43 AM)
They could've charged $60 a year like the others and it wouldn't have made a difference. It's free money for them, no need to justify anything. Sony and MS aren't any better in this regard considering I can play the same games online for free on Steam. Until more people wisen up and go PC they'll keep doing whatever they please
Chille
Member
(11-23-2017, 06:48 AM)

Originally Posted by Valdega

This. MS did nothing to justify the Xbox Live Gold subscription fee when they first introduced it. Same with PSN when they followed suit. Platform owners charge for multiplayer because they can, not because they've actually done anything to justify it. As long as customers keep paying for it, companies will keep doing it.

I don't believe you with PSN, they offered free games when it was still an optional service and still do.
Joyful
Member
(11-23-2017, 06:50 AM)
Joyful's Avatar
cant think of anything

they cant even get it right when its free
theclaw135
Member
(11-23-2017, 06:51 AM)
theclaw135's Avatar
A more family friendly console online ecosystem has a lot going for it. My low expectations of Nintendo's ability to get 3rd parties on board notwithstanding.
SinCityAssassin
Member
(11-23-2017, 06:55 AM)
SinCityAssassin's Avatar
It's 20 dollars, and not really. However for that cheap, I'm willing to make a gamble.
Sub Boss
Member
(11-23-2017, 07:08 AM)
Sub Boss's Avatar
Splatoon 2
Mario Kart 8
ARMS
Pokken Tournament
MindCollizion
Member
(11-23-2017, 07:20 AM)
Aren't more features being added with the subscription?
Smasher89
Member
(11-23-2017, 07:31 AM)

Originally Posted by SinCityAssassin

It's 20 dollars, and not really. However for that cheap, I'm willing to make a gamble.

They are setting the price to a easier entry barrier at first, then rising it if it gains enough subscribers, it is how every subscription has worked before, including the more recent ones on the console market. It is a trap and if enough people avoid it/speak up about it they have to skip it.

Normalisation is the term for it and im sure there is probably terms for that kind of market strategy too.
B_Signal
Member
(11-23-2017, 07:31 AM)

Originally Posted by Hinedorf

I've played 40 hours of Splatoon 2, 40 hours of mario kart, 5 hours of Arms and loved every minute. If the online charge was in place in the beginning, I'd have paid for it and I will pay for it next year.

When I look at how much time I've invested into online gaming with Nintendo, I feel I already owe them for what great fun I got in the first year.

Put this in perspective with a 60$ game like For Honor by Ubisoft which dc'd 50% of the time. If Nintendo is charging me 20/30$ for the already great online gaming services they've provided it's better than most companies will EVER come up with.

I really hope this is a joke post, fucking christ
Mazzo3
Member
(11-23-2017, 08:03 AM)
Mazzo3's Avatar
Nothing. But they prevented me from buying Splatoon 2 or Arms.
Jodast
Member
(11-23-2017, 08:21 AM)
Jodast's Avatar
I don't think Nintendo has really shown any worth to their idea of a paid online system at the moment but obviously they also haven't shared their full vision of it either.

The biggest problem I see Nintendo having is merging the phone app and Switch in an organic way. Its a pretty safe guess the phone app is being positioned as the hub of the online service, but so far the only (major) function is voice chat in Splatoon 2. Unless you play Splatoon 2 at a pro level you would likely never open the app. I don't think I have since maybe a day or two after it released. Nintendo need to make the app appealing and feature packed enough to make the hassle of using it and paying to play online worthwhile to the average user.

Now I know Nintendo is jumpy about online communication and slow to add features, but I guess by the time of launch this is what I want to see:
1. Global communication. Be able to talk and message people on your friend list at any time through the app. Not just in specific games.
2. Bluetooth audio streaming. The Switch should be able to stream audio to a users phone for voice chat. Not require them to use multiple messy cables.
3. Integrated shopping. The eShop is already available online. Allow me to buy through the app.
4. Play history. Nintendo records your play history but requires you to use both the Switch and the parental control app to get the most thorough breakdown. Both sets of information should be available from the app.
5. We already know online enabled VC is coming, but I'l list it here anyway.
6. My Nintendo integration. Same as with the integrated shopping, I should be able to perform all of the My Nintendo functions from within the app.

That said, I've fully prepared myself for the online service simply being online VC titles, more individual sub-sites in the app and a yearly disappointing drain on my wallet.
royox
Member
(11-23-2017, 08:49 AM)
royox's Avatar

Originally Posted by Hinedorf

I feel I already owe them for what great fun I got in the first year.

You already paid for a console and the games. You don't owe them nothing
Rhetorical Question
Member
(11-23-2017, 09:25 AM)
Rhetorical Question's Avatar
I don't see myself paying for Nintendo online services. But what makes me rage is actually the fact, that we don't have the possibility to buy VC games on the eShop, since they will be tied to the online services. I loved the VC games on the 3DS, but I won't spend s penny on the online services to get an opportunity to play them on the Switch.
twisted89
Member
(11-23-2017, 10:25 AM)
Literally nothing.
At this point in time my switch is just fine without an online service. With how they've handled it so far and their previous offerings it's very likely going to be thrown out the door to fall flat on its face. They all surprised us with the switch success but we need to accept they just can't do online.
Toadthemushroom
Member
(11-23-2017, 10:30 AM)
I suspect Nintendo Switch Online Service is just there to tick a box and provide online features for games that need them (DOOM, Mario Odyssey, Rocket League), but I can't see it being a core focus of the machine.

Since we still effectively know nothing about it I just hope I'm surprised. At least expectations right now mean Nintendo has a low bar to clear, but after the Online Service app and its lack of updates I'm not optimistic.
Nerazar
Member
(11-23-2017, 10:41 AM)
Rocket League is cross-play and the connectivity is good, so I'm willing to pay up to $2 per month for that service. Given that you would also receive MP-enhanced editions of SNES classics and probably also other goodies as well.

Nintendo's Online Service is the most cost-effective one and they will build in more features on top of that.
Toadthemushroom
Member
(11-23-2017, 10:45 AM)
I'm glad it's called the Switch Online Service at least. Unlike Gold or Plus its name doesn't seem to suggest that Nintendo will lock other functionality behind a subscription.

It was particularly bad last gen when on the PS3 you needed Plus to activate a lot of convenient download functionality and Live Gold to access media apps (I think).

This generation it still persists - I get locking cloud saves behind it on PS since they use Amazon Web Services whereas MS owns Azure, but you need Plus for automatic downloads in rest mode on the PS4. Which is something everyone should have.
GetSomeSponge
Member
(11-23-2017, 10:47 AM)
Nothing, and that's the exact reason I haven't brought splatoon 2 yet, if I'm paying to use online services you better give me party chat and a way to easily play with friends, otherwise my switch is going to be for single player only.

I still think it's rediculous for Nintendo to implement these online costs but hey.
Sniffynose
Member
(11-23-2017, 10:50 AM)
Sniffynose's Avatar
Nothing just like Sony and MS so no wonder they are copying lol
Cpt Lmao
Member
(11-23-2017, 10:50 AM)
If Nintendo were smart they'd forego it entirely, when the Switch Pro releases they can begin to poach Xbox One & PS4 players that want free online.
Grinchy
Member
(11-23-2017, 10:58 AM)
Grinchy's Avatar
The only reason anyone pays is because they're forced to if they want to play online. At least Sony and MS have other little benefits to take some of the sting away from the gamer extortion.

The problem for Nintendo is going to be that it has no online games anyone cares about playing throughout the year except for the very hardcore who thinks that Arms is an esport. They'll have a massive problem if very few people pay up and no games have any players online.

They should probably do what Sony did with the PS3 and keep gaming free but charge for some kind of discount service.
Taker666
Member
(11-23-2017, 11:07 AM)
Taker666's Avatar
I think Nintendo would be better off focusing on a "free" game catalogue with the subscription .. and maybe a bonus like a digital Nintendo Power magazine every month/week and maybe early access to new game demos (from E3 and the like).

Keep the actual online free but have something else that's worth subscribing to without feeling you're forced to.
Rellik
Banned
(11-23-2017, 11:07 AM)

Originally Posted by Sniffynose

Nothing just like Sony and MS so no wonder they are copying lol

Sony offered games every month for your subscription that wasn't mandatory for online play.
EuropeOG
Member
(11-23-2017, 11:21 AM)
EuropeOG's Avatar

Originally Posted by Rellik

Sony offered games every month for your subscription that wasn't mandatory for online play.

But now it is mandatory for online pay (at least f2p games still don't require it) and is the main reason people pay.
Louis Cyphre
Junior Member
(11-23-2017, 11:27 AM)
Louis Cyphre's Avatar

Originally Posted by Chille

I don't believe you with PSN, they offered free games when it was still an optional service and still do.

Then those free offerings should not be hidden behind an online multi-player paywall like before. Let the customers decide if those games are worth the fee. Don't you think it's more than just coincidence subscriptions spiked big time when they stopped offering online free?
WaterAstro
Member
(11-23-2017, 11:31 AM)
WaterAstro's Avatar

Originally Posted by Hinedorf

I've played 40 hours of Splatoon 2, 40 hours of mario kart, 5 hours of Arms and loved every minute. If the online charge was in place in the beginning, I'd have paid for it and I will pay for it next year.

When I look at how much time I've invested into online gaming with Nintendo, I feel I already owe them for what great fun I got in the first year.

Put this in perspective with a 60$ game like For Honor by Ubisoft which dc'd 50% of the time. If Nintendo is charging me 20/30$ for the already great online gaming services they've provided it's better than most companies will EVER come up with.

The question is what did they add that justified paying for online?

Those games did well online on the Wii U, so what is better this time? Achievements? Friends system? Online features? Free games? I'm talking about things on the system level because you're not going to buy every online game. The game price is separate from the online sub.

"Online works" is something that should be expected when you buy a game.
Kelegacy
XBOX - RECORD ME LOVING DOWN MY WOMAN GOOD
(11-23-2017, 11:58 AM)
Kelegacy's Avatar

Originally Posted by B_Signal

I really hope this is a joke post, fucking christ

I don't think it is. I hear people like that all the time on the internet.

When corporations become our official masters, you can thank mentality like that. We are a garbage people.
Xenobureido
Banned
(11-23-2017, 12:06 PM)
They've done nothing. Quite the opposite, they've 'evolved' voice-chat into some obscure thingy. System-wide party-chat is one of the PS4's best features ... and it's free.

But people will pay and that's that then. Our only hope is that maybe there's a younger audience that feels lost with online fees ... 'unfortunately', the Switch' audience doesn't appear to be young.

Personally, I'll have no problem ignoring this. Now that Capcom killed Monster Hunter, there's no game I *need* to play online.
BratmanDu
Member
(11-23-2017, 12:10 PM)
BratmanDu's Avatar
I mainly only play Splatoon2, but in fairness there's been a great deal of content for it so far, and splatfests are good fun.

If i was going to have to pay though - there'd need to be some sweetener, virtual console stuff or something.
MegaMelon
Member
(11-23-2017, 12:11 PM)
MegaMelon's Avatar
Because people will pay for it and $$$ will mean more to nintendo than the criticisms from people online. When pokemon comes out, it'll be interesting to see whether they'll make an exception or not. If they don't then you can be sure lots of people will cough up the cash.
Fbh
Member
(11-23-2017, 01:29 PM)
Fbh's Avatar
What has any console maker done to justify it ? MS and Sony can't even keep microtransactions and loot boxes from their first party games despite the fact that we pay them like $40 a year just to be able to play online.

Nintendo, (just like the other 2) are charging because they can. Because they know there are people that will pay to play the online modes in MK8, Splatoon, Rocket Legue and at some point Smash and Pokemon.
The console continues to sell great even after revealing their paid online plan and I bet they have run the numbers and decided it's better to have 30% of users playing online and paying than having 80% playing for free.
m0t0k1
Member
(11-23-2017, 02:01 PM)
m0t0k1's Avatar
The biggest reason why i save a lot of money on gaming these days. I was interested in Arms but i refuse to pay for online so i won't buy the game. All online multiplayer focused games are a no no these days for me unless i can play them on pc. Also the biggest reason i don't own a ps4 is because of payed online. I seriously hope Nintendo will introduce some kind of loyal fan program and let us spent gold coins on free online or something along those lines. But i am not expecting it Since Iwata is gone lots of Nintendo decisions have been more business oriented then consumer oriented.

Thread Tools