-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Nintendo Paid Online Services Include Free NES/SNES Game Every Month (for that month)
- Thread starter GuitarGuruu
- Start date
Evil Monkey DTT
Banned
I'd rather have nothing, if we don't keep the games it just seems like a tease every month.
BlastProcessing
Member
It's a balance to be sure, if you over restrict then that's a problem, but no restrictions can create issues as well. A user base is something that needs to be grown and cultivated and I don't think it's strange to think that a gaming company would sometimes rely on game design philosophy to do that.
I think the core issue on this will be pricing, not the 1 month limit.
Audioboxer
Member
Having to be subbed is a restriction though, as it means that Sony and MS can foot the bill for the games they add to the PSN+ or XBLG roster. I think we should all remember Sony and Microsoft pay the developers. Sure they're not going to be getting the value equivalent of 20m downloads at the games RRP. However there's a coin to flip as to whether the dev would have made the amount Sony or MS are going to lump sum pay them by selling the game via normal channels from day 1. It's not like these devs get forced to put their games up either, I'm sure MS/Sony approach them or them Sony/MS. Basically, people get paid for their work, let us stop pretending this is all some charity case.
The market would be in a much worse off position if we were simply stuck paying for MP with no additional benefit. It could have been that way if such restrictions some may be calling for were the predominant accepted by consumers. Heck MS would probably have loved if consumers accepted their DRM restrictions. The thing is though in a "free market" usually healthy restrictions win out because on average consumers won't accept getting bent over and fucked stupid. Most of us accept the world turns on money, and devs and publishers need to make it, but what we don't accept is shitty decisions masking behind strawman arguments and false equivalencies.
You're not wrong, but I more so meant if at this Switch unveil they had been humble and honest about the work and effort they needed to do for online and how important it was going to be. You know, appear to give a shit and set out a plan. Then some fledgeling steps for launch like some basic voice chat (on the fucking console OS) and okay, a paid service to help them, but at least one with games on par with XBL/PSN+. I said in another topic we have to accept they don't have the 3rd party library to draw on like Sony/MS, so okay lets accept SNES/NES for now, but then they uppercut us with this shitty 30 day trials nonsense...
At that point, people would cut them a bit of slack and expect the next 6/12/18 months to be iterative, improvement following improvement. Kind of like how Sony had to work to keep plugging all the major differences between PSN and Live.
But no, Nintendo
What makes that gif even funnier is that someone on twitter said that the joy cons with the hd rumble felt like jerking someone off. That mini game is way too accurate
Pie and Beans
Look for me on the local news, I'll be the guy arrested for trying to burn down a Nintendo exec's house.
Any of that would make sense if every single Virtual Console up to this point hadn't ALREADY been a dripfeed 'focus' that always manages to disappoint in the end.
Lets all really form a community around Urban Champions again for a month. Yes I know there's only 12 months in a year and that means it will take a decade to ever get through any one systems top 100, let alone multiple systems.
The only way the service would be 'interesting' is if the free games were salvaged things like Starfox 2 or Mother 3. But we all know they're going for full whack. I thought Frank was above drooling kool-aid out of his mouth, but blimey.
I guess it would also disrupt 'the value of games' if Nintendo we're to just log peoples WiiU or 3DS rom downloads and let them download shit they already paid for again. Heaven fucking forbid.
Audioboxer
Member
Brb, reinstating pre-order.
WhiteRabbitEXE
Member
So what you're saying is Nintendo should apply this tech to teledildonics.
BlastProcessing
Member
Sure.
I want to make it clear, I am not saying that all restrictions are good and I think everyone should be able to decide on their own what they find acceptable. I was just pushing back against the idea that all restrictions are all inherently bad. In this case, the idea of intentionally funneling users towards specific games at specific times can have merit.
Wonder Peter
Member
I hope it's cheap compared to the other ones, i don't want to pay a lot just to play splatoon 2 and Mk8 Deluxe online :/. I only subbed to PSN+ once and it was to play Bloodborne online, i hate the whole subscription to play online.
We're going to have to pay $40-60 a year just to be able to trade pokemon. That sounds so insane.
That's the other side of this. We don't know how modified these games are going to be.
Not that that would make it a "good" value proposition, but it would be a lot less shitty if every game of the month was something that you couldn't just pull off any ROM site for free with less than a minute's notice.
TetraGenesis
Member
I'd pay a high price for all that free stuff!
Unless the Pokebank fee is giving us access to "free trading/battling" now too, next pokemon game might be the one i skip, and I've got 1 game from every release of the games, Netbattle/showdown it's in that case.
Audioboxer
Member
10/10 Nintendo wins the generation. I take back all my smug criticism.
lol guess it would really depend how much people like jerking someone else off
Maximus.
Member
Meh, I am not surprised Nintendo is charging for online play, its competitors have been doing the same for quite some time making easy money. The idea of getting a game rental for free a month isn't a big deal to me. If it is a quality game you want to play, it is better than the trash that PS+ has been spitting out for generally the whole lifespan of the PS4. Nintendo doesn't owe anyone a game to permanently play when subbed, it is still something. Now is Nintendo in a position to make such decisions? No, but looking at the pricing of everything for the Switch, nothing seems competitive.
If you gave people the games, they would still be funneled when the games get put up because they'll want to try their new games.
This is just Nintendo Nintendoing.
Nintendo putting their effort where it matters
TetraGenesis
Member
The defenders... It shouldn't surprise me but I guess it still does.
BlastProcessing
Member
Possibly, but Cifaldi's other point (and one I absolutely agree with as an indie dev) is that the value of games is being rapidly decreased to unsustainable levels. So scarcity could help the market in general.
Again, I don't want to say that Nintendo is 100% correct here or that this is even their motivation, only I see it is a valid approach. The details on pricing and what games are being offered are vital on this.
Coriolanus
Banned
I remember how, in the long run, selling used games would kill the games industry.
And how, in the long run, piracy would kill the games industry.
And how, in the long run, AAA gaming would kill the games industry.
And how, as the years pass, so many god damn things are said to be killing the games industry.
And yet it grows every god damn year. It shifts, turns, mutates, and grows.
A plethora of games at little cost to the consumer will do as much to kill the games industry as netflix did to kill the film industry. What did netflix kill? Oh, that's right, outdated business models. The industry that it depends on remains quite god damn healthy.
Until concrete evidence is presented that the games industry is being actively harmed by lower prices, please, stop living in fear that it is dying. Far more likely that it is killing outdated business models, like, yknow, the wiiu. And good riddance to that.
Yeah, if only people actualy voted with their wallets instead of bitching they might actually see the desired result. Of course the ones that loudly bitch are the vocal minority with a strong sense of entitelment. I personally don't agree with Nintendo's pricing policy and that's why they don't usualy see my money. If I'm ruining the games industry with my actions so be it. Of course I'm not, Nintendo are fine without my money and I'm fine without their products most of the time.
I mean, the fact that Just Cause 3 cost tens of millions to make does not mean that I should see it as 60 value, in my eyes it was barelly worth the 15 I paid for it. I did nothing wrong in waiting for a discount, if the publisher/developer behind the game overspends, is not happy with their margins, overestimates the draw of their IP and ships a unfinished product they should probably think their strategy over again. Guess who's problem this is not, mine. Sorry for the offtopic and venting but this consumer guilt bullshit brings my piss to a boil. Bad managment and decicions are to blame for these problems, not fucking Steam sales. And most of the time these are growing pains of an industry anyways.
Back on topic, I was mildy anticipating the Switch as I actually believed that it would ship at the sub 300 price bracket. The high price of entry and paid online are the final nails in the coffin, these things have been said a million times already but godamn some of these decisions are puzzling to say the least.
Been loving my NES mini but even that managed to leave a sour taste in my mouth with the whole scarcity thing. I just don't have a lot of faith for Nintendo these days.
This is all nonsense. Consumer value had nothing to do with Scalrbound being canned. It was canned because it wasnt coming together.
malboroking
Banned
Or maybe they could just be like their competition and give you the game for as long as you are subscribed to their service?
I don't always want to play the game right away, I've downloaded dozens of titles that I played at a later date on Plus. Nintendo's implementation is hot garbage and should be called out as such. Not to mention I've already played every Snes and Nes game that I'm interested in multiple times. If this isn't something like 20$ a year than the value proposition is totally out of whack.
Jack Scofield
Member
I feel like many of the defenders are vastly overestimating the amount of time they'd spend playing old NES games. Sure, maybe you'll play it for a few minutes, but are people really going to be excited about playing Soccer for longer than five minutes?
Palette Swap
Member
So after getting thoroughly fucked by that controller price, you can jerk someone off ? Sounds like a party to me.
I can see where you are coming from and I don't want come off as harsh but the sheer amount of games that are available means that not everyone gets a decent piece of the pie. I firmly believe that if a game is truly special it can succeed without pricing it to unsustainable levels. I can only speak for myself but scarcity would mean I would spend less. If a good game isn't selling it's because the market does not see the value or are uninformed.
People expect cheaper prices, especially on the pc where the competition is fierce. Things have to be budgeted acordingly.
I would rather jerk myself off, don't need a subscription for that.
TetraGenesis
Member
Which is why one NES or SNES game per month is incredibly poor value.
And it's not about playing a game for longer than a month. It's about playing a game when you want to and for however long you want to. And then choosing not to play it for a really long time but then having the luxury to pick it back up again because you felt the urge or because you want to play with a friend.
PS+ members got Rocket League, a 2015 GOTY, at no extra cost the day it was released. The fact that it was a brand new game is one pillar of value, the fact that it is a GOTY contender is another, that fact that (at the time) you could only get it on one other platform is another pillar, the fact that it came included with a PS+ subscription is another, the fact that there are people (like my roommate) who got that game for free in July of 2015 and still have the luxury of playing it for hours each weak into 2017 is another massive effing pillar of value.
We've got a goddamn Roman proscenium of value here for something that shakes out to $5 a month.
Unless Switch's online is preposterously cheap, their value is a sandcastle.
Audioboxer
Member
Well said.
The industry can be hellish as a developer, but that again is the "free market" on the development side. Our hobby and industry opened up as time progressed to individuals in "their parents basement" being able to craft fantastic "one man team" games, that rocked the world. Therefore at times it must be like trying to get into the movie and TV industry. You need a combination of the right timing and an amazing product to make it big. That's life though, and it's how it is in many arts and crafts industries. I have a lot of empathy for devs slaving away trying to make meats end, but it's the world we live in where there is so much damn talent all fighting over the wallets of consumers. There's further debates to be had here about how bad publishers mishandle talent, but that's veering way off topic.
It is never a good move to start blaming the people who can put food on your table though. No matter how difficult things get in development or how pissed you might be at seeming injustices (people saying they'll get your game second hand, 90% off, or worse via piracy), you just have to keep trucking and doing the best you can. Gamers are incredibly loyal at times if the right messages get sent and they see their time and money be valued, even if some cannot or will not spend as much as their neighbour. Nintendo are getting raked over the coals because some of us don't think they are attempting to value our time and money as best as they can. It's that simple really. The proof we have to come to this conclusion are other companies who offer a seemingly better value proposition. This isn't gamer entitlement, at this stage as there is evidence to back us up it is simply voicing a complaint that we feel Nintendo can do better.
Dr. Kitty Muffins
Member
I hope this costs 40 to 50 bucks per year and no more.
It isn't a terrible idea and if the service is priced accordingly it might catch on. Currently the other companies give you a couple of older games and cover their online for ~$5 a month ~$60 a year. Devaluing those titles or not doesn't reduce the perceived value to the consumer.
BlastProcessing
Member
Ecosystems have to find an equilibrium to be sustainable. The market has been through a massive disruption over the last decade and that's good, but we haven't settled into a new, sustainable normal yet. Game companies have been shutting down left and right for a reason.
I used to believe, like you do, that quality games will always win out, then I started making games and hanging out with devs. I don't expect you or anyone else to change you habits. Look out for yourselves and enjoy the cheap games, but somebody on the other end needs to figure this out before every game is a free to play mess.
Audioboxer
Member
Games on other services aren't always "old". We've had some day 1 content on PS+, and I believe XBLG has too. Not to mention most of the content that is older, tends to range into months, opposed to years. Nintendo is already at a perceived disadvantage offering content that is 20/30 years old, before we even get to the fact we now can't play for longer than 30 days.
So Nintendo is offering a paid online service. Because MS and Sony do too. Except Nintendo has to do things in a uniquely Nintendo way.
So....
- You need a Smartphone app to use voice chat.
- You get to play a different free NES/SNES VC game with online multiplayer every month when you're subscribed but you don't get to even keep it.
- You're shit out of luck at the launch of the paid service if you're not in the USA, Canada, or Mexico.
Really robust feature set. Very impressed with Nintendo moving forward with this clearly well thought out and very well prepared service. I think they're going to knock it out of the park.
So....
- You need a Smartphone app to use voice chat.
- You get to play a different free NES/SNES VC game with online multiplayer every month when you're subscribed but you don't get to even keep it.
- You're shit out of luck at the launch of the paid service if you're not in the USA, Canada, or Mexico.
Really robust feature set. Very impressed with Nintendo moving forward with this clearly well thought out and very well prepared service. I think they're going to knock it out of the park.
Souldestroyer Reborn
Banned
They're uh...really hitting it out the park huh?
Not read all of the stuff yet but going by your write up, are they actually trying to challenge the XO reveal or something?
Audioboxer
Member
Wait, what is this? Admittedly I've spent chunks of today catching up as I was asleep when it all happened live, but is their online service only rolling out in stages or something? lol
I mean is the whole of Europe absent or something?
BlastProcessing
Member
They've also given out day of release games. Binding of Isaac, Resogun, Rocket League to name a few. Hell, Resogun was a PS4 launch game and that was included 1 of the 2 games for the ps4 they added to plus on launch.
And while yes, the other guys give out old games, they are months old not decades old.
I don't know, but the only place you can get official English information on the online service is NoA's Switch page, and it has that footnote disclaimer. The Europe site just says the paid service will launch "autumn 2017". There just isn't much information about this at all. Considering how they're not ready to even launch a paid service until later this year, it reasons that their infrastructure details might not be fixed either so maybe even Nintendo doesn't know.
Audioboxer
Member
I'm going to assume everyone is getting MP day 1 because it'll fall under the "free trial". I assume the rollouts must be to do with whenever the app is made for your region lol. Still, what a mess. Sounds like the console needs some more months in the cooker. Although it can't really wait till the fall with the Scorpio coming. E3 will even be a bit late as pretty much the whole of the 2nd half of this year will be about Scorpio.
Either way Nintendo have had years to sort all of this out. MP worked on the Wii U as well, it just needed built upon.
Yes I'm talking about the paid service. It's going to be very unusual if some regions suddenly have to pay to play online when others don't. Or if some regions have to pay to play online and other regions suddenly can't play online at all.