• 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.

Free NES/SNES Games for Nintendo Paid Service Only Playable For Free For One Month

I'm having trouble finding any reason to consider paying for their online service unless it's 15 bucks a year, and I know that ain't happening. Even then I'd have to think about it because that's a lot to... to uh... Play Splatoon 2? Play Balloon Fight for a month and Mario Bros. (not Super) the next?
 

benjammin

Member
I'm trying really hard not to just post like 15 laughing.gifs


Because I honestly don't know how to react to something like this. It's utterly baffling how Nintendo could have looked at the market, at the things the competition is offering, and come to the conclusion that this is an acceptable, competitive effort.

unbefuckinglievable
I think it's pretty obvious at this point that Nintendo doesn't feel like they're competing with MS and Sony. I can't imagine any group of level headed executives sitting around and agreeing that all of the decisions that have been made regarding this console will help them to outsell the PS4 or Xbox. They feel like they're competing in their own space with a die hard fan base that will buy anything that they put out, and hope to catch a decent portion of the casual crowd. I think it'll be tough to justify when your second console costs at least 40% more than your primary one.
 

jelly

Member
I don't think I could recommend any console to young kids with paid online. Nintendo was always my go to when family asked.
 

Scoobie

Member
Wait a minute, when you get PS+ games on PS and get to keep them while you're subscribed, you're effectively building a library of games that makes you more invested in the service and more likely to renew your subscription.

My PS+ subscription lapsed recently, and i wouldn't have renewed if i wasn't going to get my past PS+ games back (not really into online/multiplayer).

This seems like a dumb move from Nintendo.
 

Airola

Member
Ok, the only way for Nintendo to redeem themselves with this issue would be to let people keep the game if they beat it or gain certain amount of points during that month (without using save states). That would be really cool.

But I'm sure that will never happen.
I'm kinda still hoping that this Chris Kohler guy asked it from Nintendo and actually got the same response what his initial tweet was and he misunderstood it again.

But as that most certainly is not how things are, Nintendo, make the "beat the game / get certain amount of points and you can keep the game" system real.
 

Shrennin

Didn't get the memo regarding the 14th Amendment
I'm starting to back away from wanting the Switch. It's clear that Nintendo doesn't understand online, and just implemented a paid online system to have a paid online system with little value. No one is going to want to play Nintendo games online over XBL or PSN, which will almost assuredly have infinitely better online for their (Microsoft and Sony) games.
 

Oresama

Member
I think it's poor wording on Nintendo's part.

What I believe they are trying to say is that the game is free for that month only and is replaced by a game the following month.

If it was not claimed within the month, you are SOL and must pay for it. If you download the game within the month it's offered, then you retain it in your game library so long as you remain a subscriber.

Just like PS+ basically.
 

SmokedMeat

Gamer™
It really hit me yesterday that the only Nintendo game we play online is Splatoon. Mario Kart and Smash are 100% local play.

Sorry Splatoon 2, but I might have to pass on you if Nintendo expects $40-$60 per year to play you.
 

mooooose

Member
This is fucking bullshit. Nintendo needs achievements, voice chat, and more free VC games. I don't need new games, VC games is good enough. Give me 1 from each platform (NES, SNES, N64, GC) with online, and I'd be happy. Let me keep it.

I understand wanting to keep their value up, but when you're down like Nintendo is, you need to leverage your worth. They are making a huge fucking mistake and I'm tired of it.
 
I'm keen to hear further details but unless this is a significantly subsidised service compared to Xbox Live and PSN then it's going to be hard sell to Nintendo's target market which is young kids. Regardless I will subscribe as I'm buying the console and will be playing Mario Kart Deluxe and Splatoon 2 online so I have no choice.
 
I think it's poor wording on Nintendo's part.

What I believe they are trying to say is that the game is free for that month only and is replaced by a game the following month.

If it was not claimed within the month, you are SOL and must pay for it. If you download the game within the month it's offered, then you retain it in your game library so long as you remain a subscriber.

Just like PS+ basically.

If this was the case then why haven't they addressed this in recent interviews? I hope you're right though :)
 

xrnzaaas

Gold Member
They really live in a bubble. They come up with something like this in a time when you have monthly free "new" games from online console subscriptions, almost free games from various humble bundles and refund policies on Steam allowing unlimited trials.
 

Dekuboy

Neo Member
Doesn´t it just depend, if the game is free to buy and if you delete it you can´t get it for "free" anymore.

What if I save this on a different sd card? And then plug it offline in? How will they be able to detect that?
 
I think it's poor wording on Nintendo's part.

What I believe they are trying to say is that the game is free for that month only and is replaced by a game the following month.

If it was not claimed within the month, you are SOL and must pay for it. If you download the game within the month it's offered, then you retain it in your game library so long as you remain a subscriber.

Just like PS+ basically.

Pretty sure Reggie already said you lose it after that month.
 

Dr.Tentacle

Member
I think it's poor wording on Nintendo's part.

What I believe they are trying to say is that the game is free for that month only and is replaced by a game the following month.

If it was not claimed within the month, you are SOL and must pay for it. If you download the game within the month it's offered, then you retain it in your game library so long as you remain a subscriber.

Just like PS+ basically.

Have you seen Reggie's interview ?

Nintendo’s online service for Switch will charge a monthly fee and one of the incentives is one free classic game “per month.” Does that mean you lose access to that game after a month?

Reggie Fils-Aime: Correct. It means that essentially you’ve got access to that game for a period of time, and then after the month there’s a new selection. You’ll have the opportunity to buy it, but [after] that month we’ve moved on to another game.
 
It's amazing how stingy Nintendo are with ROM files of old games over 2 decades old that they do literally no development on at this point (having already been through Wii, Wii U, and in some cases 3DS passes for everything they want to fix), just basic emulator compatibility testing and the legal hoops to release them, all of which they should have nailed down pretty well by the 4th time now. 5th, if you count the NES Classic. (Even more if you include the GBA stuff and Animal Crossing.)

Two services giving us a mix of brand new and old games for free every month. The third clutching a single 20+ year old game to their chest tightly.
 

Oresama

Member
Pretty sure Reggie already said you lose it after that month.

I'll cancel my preorder if that's the case, which is why I was giving them the benefit of the doubt.

Please post a source, I wouldn't want to cancel just on a whim.


Edit: wow, just saw the source, guess I'm cancelling. Hopefully they change their tune after the backlash.
 
People seem to be forgetting that these game have online. They aren't offering single player games, but online games. Its a good model. By switching the game out each month, it ensures a big as possible online community until its replaced instead of it being dead within a few months after launch since its a retro game and probably wouldn't be able to hold up a online game comminty for very long.

This would be much better received I think if it wasn't tied to pay online but its own $5 a month or so subscription. Its pretty great idea to have rotating online retro games, but tying it to your online service fee vs PS+ and XBL offerings is for sure dumb. I commend Nintendo for the idea and I love their online games will be getting the service anywayz but it will be looked down upon verses the competition and should've been its own thing unless the service is actually only $10-$30 a month so a cheaper experience than the competition. Guess we'll see the price later but I expect the worst.
 

zeniselv

Member
The switch has such huge potential to be the return of Nintendo to the big leagues, but shit like this is going to put off a lot of people, first there isn't much information in wich games the system is getting, wich makes it hard to justify the service, second, Nintendo has yet to prove they can get online right, I know this is the usual Nintendo move,but with their huge catalog of nes and snes games, giving one and just for one month just hurt its image to consumers, you just have to look how many react when indies are given on psplus or live gold.
 

a916

Member
And these are the ill thought policies that make me question why I think Nintendo can justify a subscription out of the box when they haven't proven they can do an online infrastructure justice while their competition has had almost a decade headstart.
 

Lindsay

Dot Hacked
Still find it bizarre how barebones their service is gonna be. Online play, some app thingy, limited game rental of nintendos choice, discounts an thats all? Like why not keep Miverse and add it to this roster? Live/PSN have their own community things now yet Nintendo dumps theirs lol.

On the bright side:
Trading Pokémon with strangers is too easy
Now peeps can happily return to the stone ages of trading/battling locally if they don't wanna pay up! It'll be alot harder ta fill up the pokédex now, yet so much more personal for so many people!
 

Astral

Member
On the bright side, NES/SNES games are extremely short for the most part and you can beat them in well under a month. Now if you ever wanna play them again however...lol.
 

Audioboxer

Member
On the bright side, NES/SNES games are extremely short for the most part and you can beat them in well under a month. Now if you ever wanna play them again however...lol.

Another issue with this precedent being set with shitty SNES/NES games (yes I know many are quality) is if Nintendo ever start to offer indie/Switch games enjoy having them for 30 days? Sony and MS laugh incredibly hard whilst making bank off their paid services.
 

zeniselv

Member
Another issue with this precedent being set with shitty SNES/NES games (yes I know many are quality) is if Nintendo ever start to offer indie/Switch games enjoy having them for 30 days? Sony and MS laugh incredibly hard whilst making bank off their paid services.

To be fair, something similar was one of the features psplus had at the beginning, wich was trial time, I think its still up there, but they certainly had to up the game because it didn't work, so im honestly hoping this online service of Nintendo bombs, because if not, we can be certain that Sony and Microsoft will follow suit, just like Sony and later Nintendo followed Microsoft example with paid online.
 
Top Bottom