Nexus Zero
Member
I would have happily paid for Wii U online, which I found to be flawless. So many connection issues with Switch tho, I doubt I'll bother
-
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 Switch paid online coming 2018 ($19.99 a year, Dr Mario w/ online play)
- Thread starter jmizzal
- Start date
These are still rented games. You pay to have access to these games for a limited time. Once you stop paying, you can't play them.
They are, you only have access to the (potentially over time changing) library while you are subscribed.
Maybe that's why they aren't charging for another six months.
Right, but being a library of small roms running in a system-level emulator isn't costing them a ton of money and you're not going to save anything of note by them removing it. "Free" games are a part of all the online services now, so this is their crack at it in a way that they can still charge 20 bucks for.
tkscz
Member
Netflix like is probably a better way to put it then. Previous way they had it was really a rent system.
Run Jump Stomp
Member
I doubt it, right now if you buy a game under one profile, its playable on all profiles, digital or not.
But what if you want to go online with two players on one console. On PS4 that requires two PSPlus accounts.
Previously it was one rented game per month, how many games you get access to now as part of the library, we don't know yet. Netflix has a huge catalogue of movies and series available, so that comparison is a bit misleading. It's doubtful that the library will even be as large as that of Xbox Game Pass.
Telephone Man
Member
No. Nothing is still better than this.
Hell, I'd happily drop the ability to play whatever free game they throw at me if it reduces the price.
(Naturally I want this same model with PS+ and Xbox Live, if not completely free.)
Right, I get that, game wise. But what about the online multiplayer? My kid is getting more into that with Splatoon 2 and various 3DS games, would be pissed if I need a separate sub price for them going forward.
EDIT: well fuck ^ doesn't sound encouraging.
tkscz
Member
That went from a straight answer to a non-answer in one sentence. Kind of impressive.
WhiteWaterM00se
Member
MK8 is difficult to play with friends, Bomberman can still kick you for no reason.
Online should be set up the same for all games in terms of how you access it. It shouldn't be a free for all, everyone creates what they want. Minecraft you sign in thru Xbox Live. Lol.
Serenitynow
Member
Lol if Nintendo didn't intend to improve on what they have now then they would not have delayed the service to 2018.
ThanksVision
Member
Got a question... My partner and I both have Switches. If she buys a game on her Switch, can I log her Nintendo account in on my switch, redownload the game, and play using my account on my very own Switch ?
Or, which is much more likely, they simply want more users to experience the online service to hook them up for the paid service.
You can do that, but then it won't be playable on her Switch. You can only activate a user's games on one Switch at a time.
Solid SOAP
Member
$20/year is not much, I have no problem paying that so I can play Mario Kart online.
I don't see what does it change about them still being rented games. They aren't free, and you're not buying them since you don't own them.
Even saying it's Netflix like is not accurate, since you can access the whole Netflix library anytime, while you're only renting certain games based on when you start the subscription.
ThanksVision
Member
Thanks for the info. Shame there's no way to play at the same time, but it makes sense.
Linkstrikesback
Member
Technically, but games and I believe NNIDs can only be active in one system at a time. I don't think you can log in her account on your switch without deactivating it on hers.
So as it stands, I love playing Splatoon 2 online. I have...a lot of time into it. But if online feature-wise doesn't change *dramatically* by the time they roll out the paid requirement for Switch online, I will not pay for it, and depending on how the content is structured in major Switch releases at that point, I'll consider getting rid of the system if that's going to hamstring games I'd otherwise be enjoying.
It's really, really hard to give Nintendo the benefit of the doubt.
It's really, really hard to give Nintendo the benefit of the doubt.
This needs testing. Nothing they have said mentions deactivating. Pretty sure can have your nnid on more than one system at a time.
Gotdatmoney
Member
$20/year isnt am issue to me well it'll.be like $25 Canadian but still not a huge issue.
Council Pop
Member
Not true. I do online local multiplayer on Rocket League all the time on my brother's PS4, and I don't have a PSPlus account.
I think we should revisit this thread in two years and see how many people who swore they wouldn't pay for online have actually stuck to their word.
AzureSkies
Member
It doesn't on PS4.
If you have the console set as the primary for the PS4 account, any account on the system can go online.
BarrenMind
Member
Does anyone know if this will work for Child Accounts on the switch if the subscription is tied to the parent Nintendo Account on that same switch?
I won't have to pay for two subscriptions, right? This is Nintendo so..
I won't have to pay for two subscriptions, right? This is Nintendo so..
A fucking Patreon, are you kidding me? Nintendo is not a charity. It is a business, and as such, it needs to justify a charge of £17.99 by providing a worthwhile service.
IMO, PS+ is well overpriced, Xbox Live started this whole mess and Nintendo Online is severely lacking in features.
I honestly believe online subs are hurting consoles in the long run. Sure geeks will pay but the mass market is turned off by paying for subs.
jts
...hate me...
How much do you value your time that $20 for a year of putting many hours into Splatoon online (and potentially other games) is too much?
Let's face it. Online play on consoles is paid for. Microsoft popped that cherry, Sony followed through, Nintendo joins now. PC is not a closed platform with a gatekeeper. Valve is in the best position to do so but would just risk an exodus. Not to mention that games could still have their free implementation of online, regardless of Steam. Basically it's not feasible on PC.
All the extra features besides online play, are simply fluff to give players the illusion of extra value and helping to swallow that bitter pill. So I really don't care about them when they come at a rip-off price of $50 or $60 a year, when I can just get online play (which is what people pay these services for) for $20.
Of course, it's understandable if even at $20 per year, people are just getting priced out of the gaming hobby. It used to be cheaper. Personally I think it would be even better for Nintendo to remove whatever VC subscription games they are throwing into it if it could just make it $15 per year. And offer them on the side for those willing to pay for them.
Icedburden
Member
Except, the mass market actually does pay for the subs.
My contention isn't about dollar amount, it's quality. Money isn't a bar here, and I don't have issues paying for online infrastructure.
I guess I can only speak for myself, but I have a lot of games ready to be played. I have more games than I have time to play them. It's about the quality of the time spent online, not the price.
My post was predicated on wanting drastic improvements. Why you'd have such an obsessive attitude about those expecting that, I guess I don't understand. The frustration at what we've seen execution-wise on a new service isn't coming out of thin air. If your attitude is that expecting more is expecting too much, and that players won't really decide to spend their time elsewhere, well, it probably says more about your priorities than anyone elses.
SoulUnison
Banned
On one hand, $20 a year is honestly dirt cheap.
On the other hand, rewarding Nintendo with money for their idea of an online system in 2017 feels wrong.
On the other hand, rewarding Nintendo with money for their idea of an online system in 2017 feels wrong.
firenskill2000
Member
As someone said a few posts up, Netflix gives you access to the whole library. Unless Nintendo changes the standard that Sony and MS have set you're only getting games released from when you subscribe forward.
Hades Hotgun
Banned
Nintendo has never even hinted at a Netflix style service. They have described something akin to the PS+ Instant Game Collection but specifically for enhanced NES titles and potentially SNES games.
That isn't anything like Netflix.
This, the voice chat being crap has no baring on me with paying online, I barely use it on my Xbox one, so far my online gaming experience on Switch has been great, no bad connection problems or anything. I just want to see the full value of everything that Switch paid online is coming with next year, if its really a netflix style VC for the games with added stuff thats a great start.
just skipping nintendos online, they prob have less then 10 games when "released", which you still need to buy to be able to play, and the price is just to get people to join in, so they if successful can do what sony does (price increase for i think the 2-4 th time in august).
Council Pop
Member
Yes ok, putting my cards on the table- I don't believe anyone who regularly plays Nintendo games online will refuse to pay the £20 a year out of anger at how basic some elements of the online structure are. Whatever they think, they'll just put up with it cos they want to play the games and because the subscription price is much lower than on other consoles.
Sure, I can see the basic concept of a Nintendo online fee putting off some casual players (regardless as to how well it's implemented), but I don't believe for one second that some avid Splatoon player on GAF will give up the game just because Nintendo aren't doing more to increase the value of their online service before bringing the paywall in.
Also, 'voting with your wallet' just doesn't work in terms of actually changing anything. Vocal gamers, the sort of people who'd refuse to buy something out of principle, are a tiny minority. The best thing to do is to make a noise, write, email, and particularly petition people in the press to write about these issues. Any time a company has actually changed their direction has been through negative press coverage, not a tiny minority refusing to buy something.
Also- the "I'm not going to buy this thing until this company do exactly what I want" thing comes across as so obnoxious and entitled. I mean whatever, I don't really care and I don't want to police anyone's behavior, but I'm not going to feel guilty about being a little bit dismissive in return.
OrangeGrayBlue
Member
A lot of people are upset about $1.67/month. Riding the metro just one time costs me more than that.
It's not about the amount. The main argument is that they have done nothing to prove they earned any of that money.
People are upset they have to pay something that won't be in a better shape than when it was free. No matter the price. It's an additional cost that isn't justifying itself.
OrangeGrayBlue
Member
No one can say one way or the other what they've "earned" until we see what they implement. Nintendo's online is pretty lackluster as is, but the shift to a paid service will also come with a shift in expectations for said service, and I'm sure Nintendo knows that. Even if this was just for the Netflix-esque classic games library they're working on, I'd say that's worth $20/year (assuming the games don't trickle out at a snail's pace, which I wouldn't put past them.)
An excerpt from the OP even describes the current situation as...
...so it sounds to me like there are plans for something less shitty once they're asking people to pay for it.
jts
...hate me...
Well, isn't that true for most price increases, i.e. see the PS Plus price increase, but also every other price increase ever in anything due to inflation.
So Nintendo decided they also want a (rather small) fee to keep an online service. What are we gonna do then? Don't see the value of paying anything to play online, don't play online. It really is that simple.
