Support NeoGAF

[GDJustin]

Pasted shamelessly from my blog, but still highly GAF relevent:

I've become increasingly convinced over the past month that the Revolution's virtual console is going to follow a subscription model, and not allow gamers to actually purchase individual titles for download. Although this hasn't been confirmed by anyone within the company, its gotten to the point that I'm virtually certain I'm correct. Here me out:

- Nintendo has stated many times (off and on the record) that the Revolution virtual console pricing hasn't been decided. "Would gamers go for a subscription model? Would they prefer that over paying for individual titles?" These are both questions that execs have asked the gaming press at informal meetings (E3, etc). They certainly aren't shying away from putting that thought out there.

- Consider the console AFTER the Revolution. If Nintendo allowed the purchase and download of individual titles, they will have essentially painted themselves into a corner. If they don't allow the transfer of these purchased titles to the new box then they're REALLY fucking their consumers, way moreso than any of the seemingly odd choices they've made in the past. Forcing gamers to rebuy the same virtual download? Absolutely no way. Yeah yeah yeah "Nintendo screws consumers repeatedly this is nothing new!" but come on. You pay $5 for Super Mario RPG on the Revo. When the Revo 2 comes out, do you REALLY believe that they'll make you pay another $5 for the same download, now that the Revo is in the closet? Even Nintendo couldn't do that, in today's age of account-tied digital purchases. In the past you at least got a new physical cart...

So that means that the purchased games would have to be made available to consumers who bought them on every Nintendo home console from here on out. The Revo 2 can't go back to not playing classic N titles, right? It wouldn't be fair to force consumers to keep the (by that time) cruddy old revolution in the living room, just because they'd bought 15 or so old NES and SNES games for it, since the Revo 2 doesn't play them. Like CD or DVD playback, its a feature that can't be removed from a product line once its in there.

- So, since the purchased games will have to be made available on these new post-revo systems, nintendo would be repositioning and reselling their old titles for the last time. That means that a gamer who buys Super Metroid for the Revo in 2006 will never be spending money on Super Metroid again. This is obviously another big problem for the company. It implies that the revolution is Nintendo's endgame or Final Solution (which it very well may be, but that isn't the point of this discussion). Whether its Nintendo's last console or not, you can be sure that Nintendo doesn't WANT it to be... which leaves one solution...

- The best and most logical way to avoid all these problems is to follow a subscription pricing model. Nintendo makes more money and avoids the sticky situations outlined above, and gamers get access to a back library of hundreds of titles for... what? $20/mo? Maybe they could set it up in tiers... ALL N titles for $x/mo, or a "just SNES" subscription for less, etc etc. Obviously no one can know the specifics of what subscription pricing nintendo has in mind, but at this point I am SURE its what Nintendo intends to do, even if they outwardly claim to be undecided. If I'm wrong I'll eat my hat

~~~

Anyway, I know topics like this normally get trolled (I do my fair share of it), but please at least try to take this one seriously, guys. The topic isn't that long and I'd like to know your thoughts.

This has been something I've been mulling over off and on for about a month or so, so I'd like you GAFFERS who are a little more serious about the games industry to fill in any flaws in my logic/corroborate with rumors/rumblings you've heard, etc. I know I'm certainly not the first person to suggest that it'll be a subscrip. model, but... like I said, the more I think about it, the more confident I become that this theory will be proven correct.

 

[Ghengis Cohen]

- So, since the purchased games will have to be made available on these new post-revo systems, nintendo would be repositioning and reselling their old titles for the last time. That means that a gamer who buys Super Metroid for the Revo in 2006 will never be spending money on Super Metroid again. This is obviously another big problem for the company. It implies that the revolution is Nintendo's endgame or Final Solution (which it very well may be, but that isn't the point of this discussion). Whether its Nintendo's last console or not, you can be sure that Nintendo doesn't WANT it to be... which leaves one solution...

Nintendo will always put old games on handhelds. This is a given.

 

[M3wThr33]

Or, you know, the next console past this will use WiFi to transfer the game save data.

 

[Letter to Elise]

xbox premium content from the first console has to be re-purchsed on the 360.

 

[John Harker]

I hear your logic, but I still don't like it.

I've never been a fan of subscription services... I HATE locking myself into things.
Sometimes your simply too busy/distracted to get your moneys worth of a subscription.

And who likes paying for something your not using?
Goddamn gym membership.

I say keep it iTunes like model - which, personally, I think they are leaning towards.

And why can't you download your games on your flash memory, and use that to play on Revo 2?

 

[Mashing]

I agree with John Harker, I believe Nintendo will go with an iTunes like service for the virutal console.

 

[GDJustin]

Ok, I guess I didn't really make one point that clear-

I think that transferring save files, from a technical standpoint, would be super-easy. Just allow them to be re-downloaded, steam-style, or sent via wifi, as someone else suggested.

My point was Nintendo would never go for that. It would be the last time people would buy their old titles... no more milking. That's why it sort of implies that the revo would be N's last console and why I said it was like painting themselves into a corner.

 

[Letter to Elise]

Ok, I guess I didn't really make one point that clear-

I think that transferring save files, from a technical standpoint, would be super-easy. Just allow them to be re-downloaded, steam-style, or sent via wifi, as someone else suggested.

My point was Nintendo would never go for that. It would be the last time people would buy their old titles... no more milking.

Or they could make you re-purchase on the next console. Nothing you've said stops them from this. MS is doing the same thing now.

 

[Deku Tree]

My point was Nintendo would never go for that. It would be the last time people would buy their old titles... no more milking.

Nintendo would never go for that.

 

[GDJustin]

Or they could make you re-purchase on the next console. Nothing you've said stops them from this. MS is doing the same thing now.

That was the point of one of my other bulleted points in my first post. MS is only kinda doing it now. Think about steam. When you "buy" a title via steam, you have it forever, available for download. Regardless of the machine. People would throw a SHITFIT if purchasing via steam meant a one-time-only download... the game is associated with the ACCOUNT and not the hardware.

If nintendo followed an individual download model, they would have to do it this way.

 

[Jumpman]

When the Revo 2 comes out, do you REALLY believe that they'll make you pay another $5 for the same download, now that the Revo is in the closet? Even Nintendo couldn't do that, in today's age of account-tied digital purchases.

Aren't these old games going to be downloaded on to a swappable SD card connected to the Revolution? If this is the case, all Rev2 would need is an SD slot, along with the proper emulators, and BC would remain intact, wouldn't it?

 

[borghe]

I am only like half a step to the side of you. I don't believe it will be a subscription per se, but you will never "own" the game. I believe Nintendo will take microstransactions to the next level. essentially 99 cents checks out a game from their library. you can play it as much as you want. keep it for as long as you desire. heck, even check out two games. but that's it. you can only have two games checked out at a time for 99 cents each. before you can download a new game for 99 cents, you have to check one of those other games back in. of course you are never actually in posession of anything. the rev maintains an encrypted key on the hard drive that is needed to download the game from nintendo. it keeps the game in memory. when you hard reset the rev bye bye game (of course the emulator could contain a soft reset in it). you have to redownload it again. considering the largest SNES games were around the same size as a 5-6 minute itunes song, this is certainly viable. n64 could get nasty with 16-32MB downloads.. but even still at broadband speeds this stuff should take under 1-2 minutes to download and all of it should fit in rev's memory just fine.

we agree on one thing though. you will not own the games. there are a zillion reasons pointing to this. on the other hand, I really doubt nintendo is going to release a model that is going to put off some people (i.e. $10 per game or whatnot).

 

[GDJustin]

Aren't these old games going to be downloaded on to a swappable SD card connected to the Revolution? If this is the case, all Rev2 would need is an SD slot, along with the proper emulators, and BC would remain intact, wouldn't it?

As I've stated (twice), the problem isn't with the lack of ABILITY to transfer the data.

 

[Kung Foo Kid]

xbox premium content from the first console has to be re-purchsed on the 360.

No it doesn't, if you purchased something on the xbox you can redownload it for the 360 without paying again.

 

[Musashi Wins!]

Nintendo would never go for that.

exactly. yuck.

 

[rs7k]

I don't think the average gamer will warm up to the idea of paying a monthly subscription to access old games. Nintendo could get some inspiration from the new Live service, and maybe start every user with a set number of points when they first log in, and give them the option to buy more points.

 

[JJConrad]

How many times has Nintendo resold Super Mario Bros.? People bought it once, twice, three times, etc... They'll buy it for the Rev and then again for the Rev2 and beyond.

I think there are other problems with this too.

Nintendo has been taking some samll jabs at MS' subcription plan for Xbox Live. I don't see them turning around and creating their own subsciber service for this.

An open "ITunes" like more is more user friendly and allows for people to test it out easier. It also leaves room for more promotional and marketing ideas.

As a third party developer, would you rather have your code make you money or be used as a pawn for Nintendo's personal service. I would be more attracted to selling my own product.

I will concede and offer a compramise that Nintendo could likely offer both. A per-download option and a subsciber based service that allows people to download every (Nintendo) game availible. I just can't see it being subscriber only.

 

[radioheadrule83]

I honestly see it going the way of iTunes.
Cheap and easy purchases linked and recorded to your account / machine.

If they wanna really bag some money they should integrate something like they have with the VIP cards in Europe. Scratch cards that add money to your balance at Nintendo.... if kids (without debit and credit cards) want in on the gaming, they just buy a top up card. Sell retro Nintendo cards or some shit... do whatever they did with Pokemon.

 

[GDJustin]

I am only like half a step to the side of you. I don't believe it will be a subscription per se, but you will never "own" the game. I believe Nintendo will take microstransactions to the next level. essentially 99 cents checks out a game from their library. you can play it as much as you want. keep it for as long as you desire. heck, even check out two games. but that's it. you can only have two games checked out at a time for 99 cents each. before you can download a new game for 99 cents, you have to check one of those other games back in. of course you are never actually in posession of anything. the rev maintains an encrypted key on the hard drive that is needed to download the game from nintendo. it keeps the game in memory. when you hard reset the rev bye bye game (of course the emulator could contain a soft reset in it). you have to redownload it again. considering the largest SNES games were around the same size as a 5-6 minute itunes song, this is certainly viable. n64 could get nasty with 16-32MB downloads.. but even still at broadband speeds this stuff should take under 1-2 minutes to download and all of it should fit in rev's memory just fine.

we agree on one thing though. you will not own the games. there are a zillion reasons pointing to this. on the other hand, I really doubt nintendo is going to release a model that is going to put off some people (i.e. $10 per game or whatnot).

Hmm... now there's an interesting solution. Why does the game have to be lost upon shutdown, though? Strictly so N makes more money? Since gamers will most likely be checking out either several or no retro titles, why not just let them keep them?`

 

[Letter to Elise]

No it doesn't, if you purchased something on the xbox you can redownload it for the 360 without paying again.

Not true.....try grabbing the DDR packs again.

 

[MutFox]

They could make it like STEAM,
in that everyone has their own account.
And from that account it remember what you've DLed.
So once you DL/Buy that game,
you can DL it as many times as you want.
As long as you're on the same account.

Though for piracy, they may have to make it where the system checks online.
To make sure that 1 account isn't being used by more than 1 person at 1 time.

 

[Gio_CoD]

I think it'll be like iTunes too. One reason is that I think Nintendo is going to use the service to entice people into buying new games. For instance, imagine buying Metroid Prime 3 and getting a code to download Super Metroid for free. The new Mario gets you Mario 3. Etc... etc... etc... It would be a great way to add extras to games without costing Nintendo any money at all.

 

[GDJustin]

I hear all the "like iTunes" talk, and I used to be in that camp, but I just don't buy it. The analogy only works to a certain point, and then it breaks down. Nintendo has a finite number of old games we're talking about here. No "new" retro titles to be added daily/weekly to the service, for one. Once you take that iTunes model past the revolution it really breaks down.

 

[Ganondorf>Link]

I doubt they would do that. I think they will go with the iTunes type setup.

 

[GDJustin]

I think it'll be like iTunes too. One reason is that I think Nintendo is going to use the service to entice people into buying new games. For instance, imagine buying Metroid Prime 3 and getting a code to download Super Metroid for free. The new Mario gets you Mario 3. Etc... etc... etc... It would be a great way to add extras to games without costing Nintendo any money at all.

Nintendo has stated many times (off the record) that retro game downloads would be provided as freebies/incentives in this manner...

 

[xsarien]

- So, since the purchased games will have to be made available on these new post-revo systems, nintendo would be repositioning and reselling their old titles for the last time. That means that a gamer who buys Super Metroid for the Revo in 2006 will never be spending money on Super Metroid again. This is obviously another big problem for the company. It implies that the revolution is Nintendo's endgame or Final Solution (which it very well may be, but that isn't the point of this discussion). Whether its Nintendo's last console or not, you can be sure that Nintendo doesn't WANT it to be... which leaves one solution...

Logic train derailed.

 

[Mashing]

I am only like half a step to the side of you. I don't believe it will be a subscription per se, but you will never "own" the game. I believe Nintendo will take microstransactions to the next level. essentially 99 cents checks out a game from their library. you can play it as much as you want. keep it for as long as you desire. heck, even check out two games. but that's it. you can only have two games checked out at a time for 99 cents each. before you can download a new game for 99 cents, you have to check one of those other games back in.

So basically it'd be Nintenflix?

 

[Gio_CoD]

I hear all the "like iTunes" talk, and I used to be in that camp, but I just don't buy it. The analogy only works to a certain point, and then it breaks down. Nintendo has a finite number of old games we're talking about here. No "new" retro titles to be added daily/weekly to the service, for one. Once you take that iTunes model passed the revolution it really breaks down.

That's not true. By the time Rev 2 is out, it may be commonplace to download gigs of information at a time. Hell, it could probably even be streamed. They could easily add GCN games into the retro library when Rev 2 comes out.

 

[crisdecuba]

You know, it could be flexible:

Option #1: Purchase the games - you own it forever. Cost is $5-$20 per title.
Option #2: Subscription - $14.99/month - download whatever you want, but when you stop paying, the titles go away.

Who says you can't offer both?

~Cris

 

[Leatherface]

Nintendo seems to be following Apple in style and marketability. I have a feeling they'll want it to be modeled after itunes for maximum popularity and profitability. A subscription service isn't the way to achieve that. A cheap pay per download is.

 

[GDJustin]

That's not true. By the time Rev 2 is out, it may be commonplace to download gigs of information at a time. Hell, it could probably even be streamed. They could easily add GCN games into the retro library when Rev 2 comes out.

Right, but it still isn't close to being the same. How many songs does Green Day have up on iTunes? 150? What about The Rolling Stones? How many songs are on iTunes total? Millions and millions?

If Nintendo starts making announcements that NES and SNES games from Capcom, Konami, etc are gonna be available on the Revo then I might rethink my stance, but as long as its just N titles, there's no way you'll have "ownership" of your downloads.

 

[Ristamar]

I am only like half a step to the side of you. I don't believe it will be a subscription per se, but you will never "own" the game. I believe Nintendo will take microstransactions to the next level. essentially 99 cents checks out a game from their library. you can play it as much as you want. keep it for as long as you desire. heck, even check out two games. but that's it. you can only have two games checked out at a time for 99 cents each. before you can download a new game for 99 cents, you have to check one of those other games back in. of course you are never actually in posession of anything. the rev maintains an encrypted key on the hard drive that is needed to download the game from nintendo. it keeps the game in memory. when you hard reset the rev bye bye game (of course the emulator could contain a soft reset in it). you have to redownload it again. considering the largest SNES games were around the same size as a 5-6 minute itunes song, this is certainly viable. n64 could get nasty with 16-32MB downloads.. but even still at broadband speeds this stuff should take under 1-2 minutes to download and all of it should fit in rev's memory just fine.

we agree on one thing though. you will not own the games. there are a zillion reasons pointing to this. on the other hand, I really doubt nintendo is going to release a model that is going to put off some people (i.e. $10 per game or whatnot).

God, that would piss me off. I hope they don't go that route.

 

[Jumpman]

As I've stated (twice), the problem isn't with the lack of ABILITY to transfer the data.

Your hypothesis is well formulated, and could very well happen. However I think it DOES have some inconsistencies. If Nintendo was so intent on maximizing milking oppurtunities, why make the Revolution backwards compatible in the first place. Why let it play Gamecube games. Wouldn't it be more profitable to resell SSBM on a Rev disc? I think Nintendo's intention with BC, is to add value for the consumer, and hopefully get people to buy the system. It's not unlike what Nintendo themselves did with the Gameboy line, and what Sony has done with the Playstation systems.

 

[borghe]

Hmm... now there's an interesting solution. Why does the game have to be lost upon shutdown, though? Strictly so N makes more money? Since gamers will most likely be checking out either several or no retro titles, why not just let them keep them?`

sorry. I meant that the game is stored completely in memory. when you hard reset you lose the game, but still have the right to play it so you can just download it again. because it happens EVERY TIME (when you power on, reset, etc) it just looks like the same "GAME LOADING" screen each time... along with loading it is downloading from the server.

and mind you I meant itunes under the sense that you wouldn't be paying multiple dollars for the games. it would truly be microtransactions (a buck or two). yes there is only a finite number of games.. this is why you only get two (or whatever) at a time. so if you want to go back and play (or finish ) Chrono Trigger a couple of months down the line, you just recheck it out for 99 cents and pick up where your save left off.

 

[radioheadrule83]

I hear all the "like iTunes" talk, and I used to be in that camp, but I just don't buy it. The analogy only works to a certain point, and then it breaks down. Nintendo has a finite number of old games we're talking about here. No "new" retro titles to be added daily/weekly to the service, for one. Once you take that iTunes model past the revolution it really breaks down.

If its linked to My Nintendo (US), Nintendo VIP (Europe) and Club Nintendo (Japan) accounts, like Nintendo Wifi Connection already is, then I don't see why that would have to be the case.

I get the point that they don't have a wealth of titles to add on a regular basis, but backwards compatability is incentive. The real money to be made is on the new software. And besides which, I believe we haven't heard the whole picture yet regarding what will be downloadable. Iwata says old games might appear in new forms, or with new options. Why does that necessarily have to be the same download as the original title?

 

[Gio_CoD]

Right, but it still isn't close to being the same. How many songs does Green Day have up on iTunes? 150? What about The Rolling Stones? How many songs are on iTunes total? Millions and millions?

If Nintendo starts making announcements that NES and SNES games from Capcom, Konami, etc are gonna be available on the Revo then I might rethink my stance, but as long as its just N titles, there's no way you'll have "ownership" of your downloads.

That's just the nature of the beast though. They're creative. Perhaps the Rev will offer strict ports, and for the Rev 2 they may "enhance" SNES and N64 games to include online play or some sort. Maybe include documentaries or "behind the scenes materials" to entice buyers to purchase additional content.

Or hell, they may just be content with the billions they made off of old games and use that money to make new games.

 

[GDJustin]

sorry. I meant that the game is stored completely in memory. when you hard reset you lose the game, but still have the right to play it so you can just download it again. because it happens EVERY TIME (when you power on, reset, etc) it just looks like the same "GAME LOADING" screen each time... along with loading it is downloading from the server.

and mind you I meant itunes under the sense that you wouldn't be paying multiple dollars for the games. it would truly be microtransactions (a buck or two). yes there is only a finite number of games.. this is why you only get two (or whatever) at a time. so if you want to go back and play (or finish ) Chrono Trigger a couple of months down the line, you just recheck it out for 99 cents and pick up where your save left off.

Oh shit. You're right, that is a good idea.

 

[BorkBork]

Would this be partly the reason why Rev only has 512mb of storage? You have a limited amount of space above which you have to delete games in order to purchase new ones. Once the game is deleted, you'd have to purchase it again. That keeps the amount of games one has to a limited amount, and they would have a steady revenue stream if they release the catalog slowly throughout the console's life.

 

[xsarien]

Would this be partly the reason why Rev only has 512mb of storage? You have a limited amount of space above which you have to delete games in order to purchase new ones. Once the game is deleted, you'd have to purchase it again. That keeps the amount of games one has to a limited amount, and they would have a steady revenue stream if they release the catalog slowly throughout the console's life.

I'd imagine that the SD slots could - in theory - allow you to off-load games to make room for others.

 

[Forgotten Ancient]

I also believe they will go the "itunes" route. With all this talk of "milking", how many old NINTENDO titles are currently available on the Gamecube? Aside from the Animal Crossing games and the Zelda bonus, I can't think of many. Instead, they've opted for putting older content onto their portables (4 swords, classic NES series, Mario 64DS).

It shouldn't be too difficult to tie downloads to an account and, upon a release of a new system, transfer them to that account. Nintendo's said time and time again that they don't want people to have to get into the subscription-based model for online gaming, and I don't see why they'd wanna do it for gaming downloads, either.

Namco am cry if Nintendo does opt for a 1 time purchase setup, though. That means we won't have to see the same repackaged arcade classics for 3-4 generations in a row.

 

[radioheadrule83]

I'd imagine that the SD slots could - in theory - allow you to off-load games to make room for others.

expandable memory for this purpose is already confirmed I believe. I'll try and find a quote.

 

[borghe]

The real money to be made is on the new software.

I don't agree with this entirely. While currently that is where the bread and butter is to be made, I think Nintendo (and MS with XBLA) are on to something. Look at ebay auctions and look what a cartridge with no box or manual goes for. obviously more than likely this is someone who wants to play the game.

as long as nintendo can introduce such a system in a competitive and recurring pricing model (something a bit different from XBLA), whether a subscription model or a rental model, there stands to be made more than just a couple bucks from this. look at the hundreds of thousands of sales we see every year on compilation titles. hell, the newest taito collection I believe is under a buck a game. put it for a buck a game in a DRM'ed environment on a limited basis and watch the money roll in.

 

[littlewig]

A subscription model would be diasterous. There is a reason why Xbox Live hasn't taken off like MS wanted it to, the subscription fee. It's harder to convince people to pay for something when they see it as one large sum, it scares them off.

Xbox live took a long time to grow, and still less than 10% of the userbase is online. You can take a look at other subscription type models, I'm sure there a number for downloading musics. None of them compare to Itunes.


If Nintendo wants to attract gamers with the virtual console, making it subcription based is not the way to go.

 

[borghe]

You can take a look at other subscription type models,

WoW and EQ say "stfu please"

edit - music is a poor comparison. when you are talking about, at it's core, 3-6 minute songs, people expect more value. not to mention all of the restrictions in place with music downloading (what can be burned, what can't be, where it can be played, etc)

comparing what we are talking about here to music services and even comparing it to XBL itself (as opposed to Arcade) is really irrelevant. blockbuster/gamefly/gametap say a subscription based gaming model works.

 

[John Harker]

I hear all the "like iTunes" talk, and I used to be in that camp, but I just don't buy it. The analogy only works to a certain point, and then it breaks down. Nintendo has a finite number of old games we're talking about here. No "new" retro titles to be added daily/weekly to the service, for one. Once you take that iTunes model past the revolution it really breaks down.

They could stretch it for years if they stagger their releases.

Every 1-3 months or something, a year is added. Month 1 of launch: get all 1986 games available. Or Month 1 of launch: All system launch titles available.

And just keep offering old games on a time based scale, constantly adding to the service, without blowing their load in one shot.

This gives the platform room and space to grow, without overloading any servers, or halting/stoping demand for the service.

ya know, like "Nintendo Download of the Day!" and some funky stuff.
Every 3 months, throw in a new publisher's backlog.

Let people make their own games - and let them sell them on the service too, for a small fee. I don't know, iTunes has similiar stuf for up-n-coming artists.

 

[GDJustin]

I'm glad borghe brought up GameTap... I meant to much earlier in the thread. It would be a very very similar service, only filled with Nintendo goodness...

 

[Forgotten Ancient]

They could stretch it for years if they stagger their releases.

Every 1-3 months or something, a year is added. Month 1 of launch: get all 1986 games available. Or Month 1 of launch: All system launch titles available.

And just keep offering old games on a time based scale, constantly adding to the service, without blowing their load in one shot.

This gives the platform room and space to grow, without overloading any servers, or halting/stoping demand for the service.

ya know, like "Nintendo Download of the Day!" and some funky stuff.
Every 3 months, throw in a new publisher's backlog.

Let people make their own games - and let them sell them on the service too, for a small fee. I don't know, iTunes has similiar stuf for up-n-coming artists.

They could offer that, but I think it would really diminish the benefit of having the virtual console in the first place.

Instead, I think the growth will come more from other developers/publishers jumping onboard and offering their titles. There's also the possibility that new games can be created through the old hardware. This second possibility might not be a huge money-maker, but it would allow some pseudo "indie" contigent that would offer gamers alternatives to what's already out.

 

[ninge]

I also agree that the subscription wouldn't work. Nintendo's hinted at philosphy in recent interviews seems to be along the lines of wanting people to play these old games on inpulse "Hey! i remember that game! awsome! ill give that a blast!" a subscription fee just doesnt allow for that.

Also. the subscription fee model gets REALLY complicated when you take into account that other companies are going to be offering there products too. How is the revenue split? Do you have to pay a seperate fee if you want to play konami games? or sega? (it could happen! its just an emulator after all...)

I personally think it will be a single purchase fee to play the game on revolution. They dont have to make it work on any future machine, they just need to position it as a right to play the game and not a purchase... either that or the idea already presented where downloads are limited and pay to check out a title.

 

[GDJustin]

I personally think it will be a single purchase fee to play the game on revolution. They dont have to make it work on any future machine, they just need to position it as a right to play the game and not a purchase... either that or the idea already presented where downloads are limited and pay to check out a title.

But then what happens when that future machine is released? Fuck that. It would be the equiv. or requiring us all to keep our N64s hooked up in the living room...

 

[John Harker]

I like the iTunes model personally, but if your not for it, heres another idea:

What if they designed the Virtual Console like it's own gaming entity?

Imagine, if you will, logging in, and you select a character (i.e. Mario) and you walk around this massive Mario 64 like castle.

Just like the castle in Mario 64, the world is full if mirros/paintings you can jump into.

Each "window" is a "portal" to a game lobby you can play. And the key to get into the portal is - 99 cents!

So you don't actually BUY or OWN the game, your basically paying to get access to the game, i.e., jumping into the portal.

Ya know, the entrance to the castle is the "Mario Franchises," turn a corner, and you find "Metroid Franchise" in the castle dungeon. Or something.

Hey, that makes playing old games even funner! Playing games is now playing a game!

And then as the services grows, add more "worlds" or "rooms" to the castle, where more games can be placed. And you pay to enter the game world. I don't know, maybe 99 cents gets you access to the game once, maybe it permenatly unlocks the door to you forever?

Anyway, at least that sounds fun