Support NeoGAF

[I Wanna Be The Guy]

So everyone who bought a game on the Super Nintendo or NES should get a Wii U copy for free then, and Nintendo owes it to you to create a new emulator on their latest hardware for eternity to run these games.

Buy a PS1 game on PSP. Oh look, I can download it on PS3 at no extra charge. Madness. What's that? I can also do tge same thing for that game on Vita? WHAT SORCERY IS THIS?!

It's not sorcery. It's basic shit. If you buy a game on Nintenso's Virtual Console then it should be playable on any Nintendo platform that game is playable on at no extra charge. It's as simple as that. Or at least it should be. How people can defend Nintendo for these things is beyond me.

 

[Nerrel]

I disagree with the notion that emulation is better on Wii U than Wii.

The original Wii VC supported 240p. The Wii U does not, not even in Wii mode.

It would be nice to have that option for a completely faithful output, but a lot of modern HDTV sets don't support 240p and it led to a lot of customers seeing a blank screen after buying VC titles on Wii.

The Wii U outputs SNES games in native HD, which not only solves that problem but improves the image quality a lot. The image is sharper and has far fewer artifacts than the Wii VC. In that regard, the quality is much better.

I don't know what res the Wii U actually renders the games at. It looks very similar to SNES9x running at 2x res with stretching, so it may be 480p but with stretching to 720p and 1080p. Stretching to HD internally in the emulator is way better than upscaling, since it doesn't blur the picture or introduce artifacts.

 

[sörine]

It's not giving it away for "free" if you've already purchased it.

If you already purchased the Wii version you can still play that version for free on your Wii U.

 

[Starwolf_UK]

My major complaint about the virtual console isn't the pace of releases but the quality of the emulation.

The Wii U is much better than the Wii, but it still displays every SNES and NES game wrong:


For whatever reason, the NES and SNES had an internal aspect ratio of 8:7 (224x256). Because this is narrower than 4:3, the image had to be stretched to be displayed on a CRT, so the original systems always displayed a wider, distorted image. This is obvious when looking at circles and squares, which turn into ovals and rectangles.

Some of the SNES games ported to the GBA, like A Link to the Past, Super Mario World, and Yoshi's Island corrected this by displaying in the native 8:7. Nintendo had an easy chance to fix this again with the Wii VC, but for whatever reason didn't. The games were emulated to stretch to 4:3 still. They didn't fix it with the Wii U, either.

It's pretty bad with Metroid, since the morph ball logically shouldn't even be able to roll without wobbling all over. Zero Mission and Fusion both display the morph ball as a perfect circle, and Super Metroid also does when set to 8:7 in an emulator. Clearly, that's how it's supposed to look. On Wii U, however, it's a distorted oval:


This is the kind of thing that unofficial emulators on PC tend to solve easily by providing enough image options and enhancements to overcome almost any of the original hardware's limitations. Nintendo seems to want to avoid this sort of thing to keep the experience simple and user-friendly, but it prevents them from ever hoping to match the emulation quality of playing on PC.

The GBA VC at least took a step in the right direction with filtering and integer scaling options, but it still feels a little minimal compared to PC. If Nintendo were to offer at least integer scaling and 8:7 aspect options for the NES and SNES I may come back to Wii U to play them there, but for now SNES9x is so much better I can't go back to my VC versions.

4:3 window is how the games were originally displayed though.

Plus you have games that are the exact opposite about 1:1 pixels being the intended image. Chrono Trigger for example. The DS version uses 1:1 pixel scaling. When you get to Magus Castle you see a full moon above the castle. It is a thinner oval shape in the DS version because the original graphic designer knew the pixels were being outputted on a 4:3 TV so the stretched the Wii VC version displays it correctly as the circular moon it should be.

Still it is incredibly bizarre that Nintendo themselves didn't design graphics with that in mind (as all your examples of it being wrong are first party) on the SNES considering they should know best how it was outputted.

 

[Hero of Legend]

Why did they even make the pixel resolution not 4:3? Seems silly since TVs weren't exactly made for 8:7.

 

[reggieandTFE]

Not having GBA games on 3DS really sucks. I'd drop $50 this minute if Advance Wars, Minish Cap, Metroid Fusion, etc. were on there.

 

[Mr. RPG]

The Virtual Console is Nintendo's most powerful asset and I feel that they did a bad job with it so far this generation. There's so many amazing games that people still haven't played yet that haven't been re-released.

The Wii Virtual Console was amazing.

 

[Omikaru]

So everyone who bought a game on the Super Nintendo or NES should get a Wii U copy for free then, and Nintendo owes it to you to create a new emulator on their latest hardware for eternity to run these games.

If there was a way to insert SNES or NES cartridges on my Wii U, I'd fully expect this. But that's a pretty rubbish argument, to be honest.

Let's put it this way:
- Back in 2010, I buy a game digitally on my iPad 1 or iPhone 3G. I now have an iPad Air 2 and iPhone 5c, and most of my games from back then work on the new devices. The ones that don't are usually pulled from the store by the publisher (see: The World Ends With You being incompatible with iOS 8), but if the developer fixed the issues then it would be downloadable to my newer device, and I wouldn't pay extra for this. And this is for native games. If we want to do an apples to apples comparison, let's look at some of Sega's games: they have a few 8bit/16bit classics available for iOS, games that were released a long-ass time ago, and these still work on my newer iPhone and iPad despite me buying them a long time ago for a different iPad. Even better, I can buy five games for less than the price of one GBA game on Virtual Console. The value proposition, both from a service level and simply raw value, is impeccable.

- I buy a PS1 classic on my PS3. As time went by, I was able to play it on my PSP, and then in the next-generation on my Vita, and now on PSTV. Sony developed the emulator for those systems gratis, and I was able to carry my purchases over. I expect if PSone/PS2 emulation comes to PS4, all my digital games for those systems purchased on PSN will work on my PS4. And PS5. And PS6. And so on. And I doubt I will pay a penny extra for the privilege. Crazily enough, I can also grab some PSone gems like Final Fantasy IX for about £1 less than an N64 game on the Virtual Console. So just like on iOS, PSN has a better value proposition for the consumer in a raw monetary terms, and also on a service level.

In comparison to its competitors, Nintendo is giving their customers a raw deal. If I bought SM64 on Wii, I should get SM64 on Wii U -- on the Wii U's N64 emulator -- for nothing extra. I've already purchased the game in Nintendo's digital ecosystem, and the expectations of the consumer are very different in that space compared to the retail space. This is especially true considering the prices Nintendo sells Virtual Console games at. This wouldn't be as big a problem if the GamePad was supported in these games in Wii Mode, but as far as I know it isn't. Nintendo is intentionally disincentivising people to play the games in Wii Mode (via inconvenience, or simply by requiring those who didn't already have them to buy a Wii Remote and a Classic Controller) with the intention of selling them to you on Wii U. Even worse is the glacial pace at which re-releases are taking. I found the release schedule of Virtual Console on Wii to be annoying; on Wii U it is shambolic.

These things should follow customers through the generations, incentivising them to stay in Nintendo's digital ecosystem, and should be offered via a firmware update within the first 18 months of the system's life (as it was with Vita PS1 compatibility).

If you already purchased the Wii version you can still play that version for free on your Wii U.

Hidden away on a separate UI, and incompatible with my modern controllers. They are not exactly making this convenient for people, are they?

 

[sörine]

Hidden away on a separate UI, and incompatible with my modern controllers. They are not exactly making this convenient for people, are they?

No disagreement but it's better than nothing. I bet plenty of PS4 owners would like to access all the PS1 games they bought last gen.

 

[Omikaru]

No disagreement but it's better than nothing. I bet plenty of PS4 owners would like to access all the PS1 games they bought last gen.

Speaking as a PS4 owner: absolutely. If Sony ever enables PS1/PS2 digital titles on PS4 -- and I sincerely hope they do, and not via PS Now -- I would fully expect them to just work on PS4 without me paying a penny extra, as PS1 games just worked on Vita when that functionality was added.

In fact, I guarantee you, if they pulled the same shit Nintendo does with VC over the generations there would be fucking hell to pay.

 

[sörine]

Speaking as a PS4 owner: absolutely. If Sony ever enables PS1/PS2 digital titles on PS4 -- and I sincerely hope they do, and not via PS Now -- I would fully expect them to just work on PS4 without me paying a penny extra, as PS1 games just worked on Vita when that functionality was added.

In fact, I guarantee you, if they pulled the same shit Nintendo does with VC over the generations there would be fucking hell to pay.

But N64 games already work fine on Wii U without extra payment. The upgrade fee nets you extra options (button config, save state, off-tv play, additional controller support) but it's not necessary if you want your VC games to "just work". They work free of charge.

Sony doesn't add much extra functionality for their Classics, except on Vita where you get button config but that's purely a function of PSP backwards compatibility. PS Classics aren't even emulated natively on Vita, they're still running in PSP mode. It's basically like Wii VC on Wii U except not partitioned to it's own menu.

 

[encephalon]

So everyone who bought a game on the Super Nintendo or NES should get a Wii U copy for free then, and Nintendo owes it to you to create a new emulator on their latest hardware for eternity to run these games.

Did I mention being compensated for physical copies? If you buy a digital copy of, say, Final Fantasy 1 (NES) on your 3DS it should carry over to your Wii and/or Wii U. Maybe you're unfamiliar, but this is exactly how it works on other consoles. If I bought Final Fantasy VII on my PSP, I can download it to my PS3 or PS Vita.

This is exactly what people are talking about when they mention an "account system."

If you already purchased the Wii version you can still play that version for free on your Wii U.

Edit: Oh, you mean in Wii mode? Lol. Please.

Sony doesn't add much extra functionality for their Classics, except on Vita where you get button config but that's purely a function of PSP backwards compatibility. PS Classics aren't even emulated natively on Vita, they're still running in PSP mode. It's basically like Wii VC on Wii U except not partitioned to it's own menu.

Sony had already been delivering game specific fixes to their emulator before titles even reached the Classics store (Ex: Chrono Cross). And while the Vita does seem to run PS1 games through PSP mode, it does so more elegantly and offers bilinear filtering, which the PSP did not.

 

[Discomurf]

...to me the biggest disappointment is the fact that Nintendo has still not released any direct ports of their arcade classics.

 

[sörine]

Edit: Oh, you mean in Wii mode? Lol. Please.

Want extras? $1-2.

Seriously the upgrade path (free for Wii, $1-2 for Wii U upgraded) is the least of Virtual Console's problems. Scheduling, promotion, 3DS cross-buy (or at least discount), that damned queue and 3rd parties dropping like flies are way more pressing.

Sony had already been delivering game specific fixes to their emulator before titles even reached the Classics store (Ex: Chrono Cross). And while the Vita does seem to run PS1 games through PSP mode, it does so more elegantly and offers bilinear filtering, which the PSP did not.

Bugfixes aren't exactly extra functionality. And again, bilinear filtering is a function of Vita's overall PSP backwards compatibility (and it looks awful btw). Nothing was added to PS1 games specifically. This is basically equivalent to Wii mode, there's no native Vita PS1 emulator. If there were they could add basic things like save states or rendering 3D games higher res, like Nintendo does for VC.

That said the barebones nature of Wii U's vWii is itself a step behind Vita's PSP playback. Things like Gamepad/Pro to Classic Controller support or button config or Wii U menu icons, system wide, would go a long way.

 

[Mak]

The Wii U is much better than the Wii, but it still displays every SNES and NES game wrong:

For whatever reason, the NES and SNES had an internal aspect ratio of 8:7 (224x256). Because this is narrower than 4:3, the image had to be stretched to be displayed on a CRT, so the original systems always displayed a wider, distorted image. This is obvious when looking at circles and squares, which turn into ovals and rectangles.

4:3 window is how the games were originally displayed though.

Yeah, the slightly stretched 4:3 is how NES and SNES games are suppose to look. When they port them to GBA and DS, they have to be 1:1 because of the fixed resolution of the LCD screens or it would look blurry.

SNES
Wii Virtual Console
Emulator
GBA (via GB Player)

The top image is how its suppose to look from the SNES version and the Wii Virtual Console version right below that is accurate to the SNES version.

In the "Stars of the Family Computer" article, it shows a picture of Takashi Tezuka designer Mario's sprite on a computer monitor with a Famicom hooked up to a TV beside it, so they must have worked under this limitation.
http://www.disgruntleddesigner.com/chrisc/secret/weekly/Stars_of_the_Family_Computer.html

Something that most people might not realize is that as a side effect of the NES and SNES resolution of 256x224 being stretched to fit the TV to 320x240 the video games actually appear to scroll faster than they actually do.

Someone who grew up playing Super Mario Bros. on a NES and CRT might have trouble getting perfect jumps if they replayed it in an emulator with 1:1 pixel mapping because the speed of the game and how its scrolling will feel different. You can see this with Super Mario Bros. DX (GBC) and the squished GBA version of Super Mario Bros.

If you put the DS version of Chrono Trigger side by side with the SNES version, even though the amount of pixels is the same, moving around on the maps on the SNES version will look faster because its resolution is being stretched to fit the TV while the DS version will feel slower because of the 1:1 pixel mapping. (The same with Zelda: A Link to the Past. With the overhead view, Link will seem to move faster on the SNES game, but slower on the GBA game even though he's covering the same amount of ground.)

256x224 on the NES and SNES was likely for performance reasons (Sega Genesis could do 320x240), and the designers worked with that limitation when doing pixel art.

It would be nice to have that option for a completely faithful output, but a lot of modern HDTV sets don't support 240p and it led to a lot of customers seeing a blank screen after buying VC titles on Wii.

The Wii U outputs SNES games in native HD, which not only solves that problem but improves the image quality a lot. The image is sharper and has far fewer artifacts than the Wii VC. In that regard, the quality is much better.

That sounds like it was problem for people running Wii on an HDTV at 480i with Composite cables (or Scart?) since most Virtual Console games that defaulted to 240p. (A special input with the Wii Remote+Nunchuk in the game manual switched some games from 240p to 480i) .

If Component cables were used and Wii was set to 480p, Virtual Console games should output at 480p instead of 240p. Wii U outputs in HD with an HDMI ouput (or Component cables) so that wouldn't be a problem.

The real problem is that Wii U doesn't output games at 240p like Wii did, but 480i when using Composite (or Component) cables on an SD CRT without a deflicker filter. (Like the Wii disc version of Super Mario Allstars or Super Smash Bros. Brawl).

 

[OuterLimits]

Speaking as a PS4 owner: absolutely. If Sony ever enables PS1/PS2 digital titles on PS4 -- and I sincerely hope they do, and not via PS Now -- I would fully expect them to just work on PS4 without me paying a penny extra, as PS1 games just worked on Vita when that functionality was added.

In fact, I guarantee you, if they pulled the same shit Nintendo does with VC over the generations there would be fucking hell to pay.

Sony does odd stuff as well. Suikoden 2 was available on PSP for a day before Sony decided to block it and only allow it on Vita and PS3. Fortunately I downloaded it to my PSP that first day.

The PS4 is also the first console that can't play PS1 discs. It sucks that the PS3 has an amazing digital library of classics which can't be played on the PS4.

I do think Nintendo charges too much for NES games and it sucks that games I buy on the Wii U have to be bought again on the 3DS. The $5 price on some NES games are ridiculous. Transferring data from one console to another is far more tedious than it should be.

The main positive though is that Nintendo offers backwards compatibility. The Vita does if you went digital during the PSP years. If you bought UMDs, you were unlucky.

I enjoy both Sony and Nintendo products. Both companies have things I like and unfortunately things that annoy.

 

[encephalon]

If you already purchased the Wii version you can still play that version for free on your Wii U.

Want extras? $1-2.

Seriously the upgrade path (free for Wii, $1-2 for Wii U upgraded) is the least of Virtual Console's problems. Scheduling, promotion, 3DS cross-buy (or at least discount), that damned queue and 3rd parties dropping like flies are way more pressing.


Bugfixes aren't exactly extra functionality. And again, bilinear filtering is a function of Vita's overall PSP backwards compatibility (and it looks awful btw). Nothing was added to PS1 games specifically. This is basically equivalent to Wii mode, there's no native Vita PS1 emulator. If there were they could add basic things like save states or rendering 3D games higher res, like Nintendo does for VC.

That said the barebones nature of Wii U's vWii is itself a step behind Vita's PSP playback. Things like Gamepad/Pro to Classic Controller support or button config or Wii U menu icons, system wide, would go a long way.

They're not "extras," they're part of the basic functionality of the Wii U's OS and how it runs VC games. You paid for these upgrades when you bought the Wii U hardware itself. Playing off-screen? Well, no shit, you're playing on a fucking Wii U.

It's not really a "bug fix," though is it? The game was never meant to be played on an emulator to begin with, so they have to tweak things to get it to work. My argument is simply that it's not as if Sony simply dumps ISO's on a marketplace. And yet they still aren't going to charge you differently for a copy of FFVII on PS3 and PSP, even if they emulate the games differently.

 

[CassSept]

If you already purchased the Wii version you can still play that version for free on your Wii U.

Not everywhere, in Poland you can't

 

[Sixfortyfive]

Not everywhere, in Poland you can't

Well that sucks. Why doesn't the transfer work?

 

[Charles Brandon]

Not everywhere, in Poland you can't

Really? That's shit. Why not?

 

[Starwolf_UK]

...to me the biggest disappointment is the fact that Nintendo has still not released any direct ports of their arcade classics.

Well Donkey Kong is off limits 100% due to legal issues (including Nintendo effectively pirating the game as a way to produce more copies for the US market but making a sequel by getting another subcontractor to hack the game to make a sequel was what really stung) and I think most their other early works were done by subcontractors.

However towards the end of their arcade reign things like the Vs. series and Play Choice 10 were heavily based on Famicom/NES hardware (so hopefully no subcontractor legal issues) so releases of those might not be a problem.

The VC missed out on tricks to really enhance value by offering extras including different region releases or variants such as the vs. series. Vs. Ice Climber for example has a stage select screen, some new enemies, different scoring and weather elements. Vs. Ice Climber was also ported to the Famicom Disk System.

The only acknowledgement these days of the Vs. series is Vs. Excitebike appearing on the Nintendo Content Creators Program whitelist for some reason.

Really? That's shit. Why not?

Poland never got a Wii Shop channel.

Not everywhere, in Poland you can't

You might be able to. Change country in the system settings (whichever one your bought games off the Wii Shop before before) then try Wii mode and access the Wii Shop channel.

 

[CassSept]

I can't because changing the country blocks me from accessing the Internet.

Wii Shop was not supported officially in Poland. It's an easy work-around, setting another country in the settings to access VC/WiiWare. However, Wii Mode takes regional data directly from Wii U settings and when you change regional settings you can't access the net, so I can't transfer my Wii data, nor access Wii Shop from my Wii U.

 

[sörine]

They're not "extras," they're part of the basic functionality of the Wii U's OS and how it runs VC games. You paid for these upgrades when you bought the Wii U hardware itself. Playing off-screen? Well, no shit, you're playing on a fucking Wii U.

I think you're mistaken, VC's emulators aren't OS level software but are packed with each game file. Consumers are literally paying for each emulator when they buy the game, not when they bought their Wii U or 3DS.

I agree off-tv play would be nice for Wii VC (you can send the image to the Gamepad at least) but that's more an issue with Wii U's limited backwards compatibility. It's definitely something Nintendo should work on though, not only for Wii VC but also WiiWare and retail Wii games. It's also something they're doing for eShop releases of Wii games (as well as Wii U OS channels) so it should be accomplishable for WiiWare/VC.

It's not really a "bug fix," though is it? The game was never meant to be played on an emulator to begin with, so they have to tweak things to get it to work. My argument is simply that it's not as if Sony simply dumps ISO's on a marketplace. And yet they still aren't going to charge you differently for a copy of FFVII on PS3 and PSP, even if they emulate the games differently.

And how's it working out for PS4 owners? It just doesn't make sense to me to belittle that Wii U owners can access the full library of Wii VC when PS4 owners get literally nothing in terms of PS Classics.

Vita too only gets classics because of PSP playback, there's no native emulation for the system and it's still hamstrung by PSP's limitations (meaning no save states, upgraded resolution, etc). The equivalent thing would be if Nintendo never bothered with Wii U VC and simply told people to buy Wii VC instead.

On the other hand I agree console/handheld cross-buy is a huge issue for Nintendo, and hopefully something NX/DeNA can recify next gen, but that's got nothing to do with cross-gen compatibility really. Cross-gen Nintendo's far ahead of Sony and likely to remain that way outside streaming.

 

[MilesTeg]

I kinda want SM64 on my Gamepad with customizable controls. But on the other hand I've already bought SM64 three times. I have my N64 cart, the DS version, and I bought it on Wii VC. I don't really want to do a Wii to Wii U transfer, I don't really feel the need to pay more money for games I've already purchased. Whether it's $2 or $10, I don't feel I should be charged again. Same goes for all my other VC purchases. It should be free to upgrade, especially since these games can be pirated with extreme ease and run at higher resolutions than Nintendo offers. That's my issue right now. I mean if I did the transfer I would probably be looking at $50+ in upgrade fees and that's just not right. Nintendo needs to fix this moving forward with their new devices.

 

[Nosgotham]

Buy a PS1 game on PSP. Oh look, I can download it on PS3 at no extra charge. Madness. What's that? I can also do tge same thing for that game on Vita? WHAT SORCERY IS THIS?!

It's not sorcery. It's basic shit. If you buy a game on Nintenso's Virtual Console then it should be playable on any Nintendo platform that game is playable on at no extra charge. It's as simple as that. Or at least it should be. How people can defend Nintendo for these things is beyond me.

Why "should" it be? Because you say so, because you think that is fair? I'm happy paying a dollar or two to upgrade to a new system that has more features than the previous emulation.

 

[Jiyuu Tenshi]

I can't because changing the country blocks me from accessing the Internet.

Wii Shop was not supported officially in Poland. It's an easy work-around, setting another country in the settings to access VC/WiiWare. However, Wii Mode takes regional data directly from Wii U settings and when you change regional settings you can't access the net, so I can't transfer my Wii data, nor access Wii Shop from my Wii U.

It's easy to do on the Wii U as well. You just need to change the country and also create a new Nintendo Network ID for this country. If you then use this NNID to boot the Wii Menu you'll be able to do the system transfer and have access to the Wii Shop Channel to download your games. After that you can change the country again and use your original NNID to play all VC/WiiWare games from your other account and you'll also get the respective eShop discounts for a VC upgrade as the Wii Mode isn't linked to your NNID but to your Wii U.

 

[Nerrel]

4:3 window is how the games were originally displayed though.

Plus you have games that are the exact opposite about 1:1 pixels being the intended image. Chrono Trigger for example.

Just because the games were originally displayed that way doesn't mean it's correct. There are lots of instances where it's obvious that the developers created their sprites to look correct in 8:7, the morph ball being the clearest example. I would say it's more important to see the game as the artists intended than it is to see the game as it originally displayed.


You are right about the inconsistency, which is the biggest obstacle to getting a "perfect" image with SNES games. Some games did account for the stretching, which means that 4:3 is actually correct. One of the Mortal Kombat games did this, and I think Street Fighter may have as well.

That wouldn't be a problem if the ability to switch between 4:3 and 8:7 were available on the fly. What is a real problem is that many games mix between 8:7 and 4:3 assets, making it impossible to ever get everything on screen to display properly at once.

Super Metroid is 99% designed for 8:7, but the final sprite of Samus after the credits is 4:3. Mario All Stars is mostly 8:7, but the HUD is designed for 4:3. It's like the developers never got on the same page about whether they were compensating for the stretching or not.

That said, the majority of games I've played display correctly in 8:7. Even if a few assets are 4:3, 8:7 is correct for the vast majority of content. An aspect ratio option would be a great solution, but the only 100% certain way to get everything correct would be for Nintendo to actually alter the sprites to make them all consistent.

 

[encephalon]

I think you're mistaken, VC's emulators aren't OS level software but are packed with each game file. Consumers are literally paying for each emulator when they buy the game, not when they bought their Wii U or 3DS.

I agree off-tv play would be nice for Wii VC (you can send the image to the Gamepad at least) but that's more an issue with Wii U's limited backwards compatibility. It's definitely something Nintendo should work on though, not only for Wii VC but also WiiWare and retail Wii games. It's also something they're doing for eShop releases of Wii games (as well as Wii U OS channels) so it should be accomplishable for WiiWare/VC.


And how's it working out for PS4 owners? It just doesn't make sense to me to belittle that Wii U owners can access the full library of Wii VC when PS4 owners get literally nothing in terms of PS Classics.

Vita too only gets classics because of PSP playback, there's no native emulation for the system and it's still hamstrung by PSP's limitations (meaning no save states, upgraded resolution, etc). The equivalent thing would be if Nintendo never bothered with Wii U VC and simply told people to buy Wii VC instead.

On the other hand I agree console/handheld cross-buy is a huge issue for Nintendo, and hopefully something NX/DeNA can recify next gen, but that's got nothing to do with cross-gen compatibility really. Cross-gen Nintendo's far ahead of Sony and likely to remain that way outside streaming.

It doesn't really matter. It's not our fault that Nintendo's method of handling VC is inelegant and requires them to release an emulator with each game file. It still isn't a compelling argument for why they should somehow be justified in charging extra for the same content, whereas Sony or MS wouldn't.

Not having save states is a deliberate choice. These are meant to be digital releases of old games as they were originally meant to be played. And it's not as if Nintendo is specifically going in and adding in features live save states to each individual game, somehow justifying a 200 yen charge. Again, this should fall under the purchase of the console platform itself.

The Vita situation is not the same as if Nintendo had told people to simply buy the Wii games. On the Vita those games are tied to a single account and don't require you to open some bullshit PSP mode then purchase or download the games from a separate storefront. When I bought my Vita I immediately downloaded games I had purchased on my PS3 from my account. This seems to be an unthinkable scenario for Nintendo.

Bringing up the PS4's lack of PS1 classics has nothing to do with Nintendo charging twice for content already purchased. On any PS console capable of emulation, regardless of whether or not the Vita took a shortcut to get there, you can play the PS classics you've purchased. The problem with the PS4 is simply the lack of the virtual console feature outright. It breaks a tradition with Sony's recent consoles that threatens to harm the legacy of the playstation and the preservation of those games. But if Sony comes out with an emulator and decides they are going to charge me 200 yen for each game I've purchased, I'll be just as eager to criticize them. And yes, I do feel that "at least I can play those old VC games on a Wii U," whereas the PS4 doesn't even have some clunky option to play PS1 games. It's quite possibly my biggest complaint with the PS4.

 

[GabeTheGrouch76]

My biggest complaint about the Wii U VC is how both at release and to this day the VC selection was effectively starting from scratch in title selection. Ideally, the entire Wii VC should had been available on the Wii U VC from the start, additional features or no additional features. Even taking into consideration that Nintendo would likely have to re-negotiate licenses with third-party developers / former first-party manufacturers in order for their games to appear on the Wii U VC, Nintendo could had easily had all of their first/second-party titles on the Wii VC available on Wii U VC at launch.

To release the Wii U with such a limited library on their VC...I feel really goes to show just how undercooked the Wii U's launch and even aspects of its design was. I actually want a Wii U more than a PS4 or Xbone, but oversights like that make me feel the console should had stayed in the oven for an additional couple of years.

For next gen, they need:

• All previous games and systems released on the Wii U available from the beginning! I'm not going to start from the top again, and I refuse to pay for upgrades. Absoulute necessity for me.
• Lots of games, released in a timely manner. Not one or two a week, give us a bunch so we can have Nintendo's history on all our consoles.
• Cross buy. Nuff said.

What would be nice:

• A subscription service. Let us pay $10 a month for access to a great-sized Nintendo back catalog.
• More emulation features. Multiple save states, scanline/filter options, etc.

Can't agree with this enough.

 

[radcliff]

For next gen, they need:

• All previous games and systems released on the Wii U available from the beginning! I'm not going to start from the top again, and I refuse to pay for upgrades. Absoulute necessity for me.
• Lots of games, released in a timely manner. Not one or two a week, give us a bunch so we can have Nintendo's history on all our consoles.
• Cross buy. Nuff said.

What would be nice:

• A subscription service. Let us pay $10 a month for access to a great-sized Nintendo back catalog.
• More emulation features. Multiple save states, scanline/filter options, etc.

I would also add the option to play these games without the slowdown and flicker of the original release due to (at the time) hardware limitations.

 

[sörine]

It doesn't really matter. It's not our fault that Nintendo's method of handling VC is inelegant and requires them to release an emulator with each game file. It still isn't a compelling argument for why they should somehow be justified in charging extra for the same content, whereas Sony or MS wouldn't.

Not having save states is a deliberate choice. These are meant to be digital releases of old games as they were originally meant to be played. And it's not as if Nintendo is specifically going in and adding in features live save states to each individual game, somehow justifying a 200 yen charge. Again, this should fall under the purchase of the console platform itself.

The Vita situation is not the same as if Nintendo had told people to simply buy the Wii games. On the Vita those games are tied to a single account and don't require you to open some bullshit PSP mode then purchase or download the games from a separate storefront. When I bought my Vita I immediately downloaded games I had purchased on my PS3 from my account. This seems to be an unthinkable scenario for Nintendo.

Bringing up the PS4's lack of PS1 classics has nothing to do with Nintendo charging twice for content already purchased. On any PS console capable of emulation, regardless of whether or not the Vita took a shortcut to get there, you can play the PS classics you've purchased. The problem with the PS4 is simply the lack of the virtual console feature outright. It breaks a tradition with Sony's recent consoles that threatens to harm the legacy of the playstation and the preservation of those games. But if Sony comes out with an emulator and decides they are going to charge me 200 yen for each game I've purchased, I'll be just as eager to criticize them. And yes, I do feel that "at least I can play those old VC games on a Wii U," whereas the PS4 doesn't even have some clunky option to play PS1 games. It's quite possibly my biggest complaint with the PS4.

Nintendo isn't charging twice for the same content though, the same Wii content runs free of charge and exactly the same as it did before. Nintendo charges $1-2 for extra functionality and new native emulation, which is an option Sony doesn't even give you on PSP to Vita or PS3 to PS4. Sony isn't apparently actively developing emulators for Vita or PS4, I think the writing's on the wall there with what to expect. Now or nothing.

Lack of save states is actually hardware limitation too because of how PSP achieves PS1 playback. PSP isn't powerful enough to emulate PS1 but it's MIPS CPU was designed with PS1 code compatibility so it only needs to emulate GPU/GTE calls. Since it's only partially emulated the system can't capture program save states and for whatever reason Sony decided to keep consistency with PS3's Classics (which are capable of save states). It's not really a deliberate choice overall, it was a design forced decision. Same for improving resolution or other emulator derived bonuses.

And the PS4 comparison is hugely relevant if we're talking cross-gen retrogames and the approaches between Sony and Nintendo. Sony has completely dropped the ball here, while Nintendo gives Wii U owners two options (Wii VC for free, Wii U VC for a whopping $1-2 upgrade) while they give PS4 owners nothing except the hazy possibility of streaming rentals some day.

 

[I Wanna Be The Guy]

Why "should" it be? Because you say so, because you think that is fair? I'm happy paying a dollar or two to upgrade to a new system that has more features than the previous emulation.

And this, ladies and gentlemen, is exactly why Nintendo keep doing this shit.

 

[Somnid]

I think the fees are probably going to be necessary. It takes time and effort to build emulators, it takes time and effort to have the lawyers track people down and sign licensing deals. There is a cost here and it's just not sustainable to ignore it over multiple generations especially when most people probably own a majority of the VC games they want. I think Sony has figured this out too. I'm willing to bet PS Classics are sliding in sales versus what it costs to put them on the platform and that partially motivates keeping them off PS4 and funneling people into PSNow.

The prices for upgrade aren't unreasonable so I'm fine to pay it. Perhaps they can do a cap type system for extremely large collections where if it would cost you over $50 then you just pay $50 or something. Maybe some effort can be alleviated by moving to this mythical unified OS and they can go a bit cheaper or give cross platform as a freebie and charge cross-gen. I dunno but the big hurdle for VC is and always will be licensing.

 

[ramparter]

For next gen, they need:

• All previous games and systems released on the Wii U available from the beginning! I'm not going to start from the top again, and I refuse to pay for upgrades. Absoulute necessity for me.
• Lots of games, released in a timely manner. Not one or two a week, give us a bunch so we can have Nintendo's history on all our consoles.
• Cross buy. Nuff said.

What would be nice:

• A subscription service. Let us pay $10 a month for access to a great-sized Nintendo back catalog.
• More emulation features. Multiple save states, scanline/filter options, etc.

Subscription would be cool but I'd like to buy many games permanently. Prices should be much lower though. For example, 10$ is a good price for most Wii / GC titles, not N64 games.

 

[Adam Prime]

Guys I need advice:

How are the NES games emulated/look on the 3DSXL. I have never purchased NES VC for my 3DS. I noticed that on the WiiU they look a little.... blurry? I don't know, something seems off by them. And like others have noticed there is a bit of input lag.

Is the emulation as a whole better on the 3DS than WiiU?

 

[encephalon]

Nintendo isn't charging twice for the same content though, the same Wii content runs free of charge and exactly the same as it did before. Nintendo charges $1-2 for extra functionality and new native emulation, which is an option Sony doesn't even give you on PSP to Vita or PS3 to PS4. Sony isn't apparently actively developing emulators for Vita or PS4, I think the writing's on the wall there with what to expect. Now or nothing.

Lack of save states is actually hardware limitation too because of how PSP achieves PS1 playback. PSP isn't powerful enough to emulate PS1 but it's MIPS CPU was designed with PS1 code compatibility so it only needs to emulate GPU/GTE calls. Since it's only partially emulated the system can't capture program save states and for whatever reason Sony decided to keep consistency with PS3's Classics (which are capable of save states). It's not really a deliberate choice overall, it was a design forced decision. Same for improving resolution or other emulator derived bonuses.

And the PS4 comparison is hugely relevant if we're talking cross-gen retrogames and the approaches between Sony and Nintendo. Sony has completely dropped the ball here, while Nintendo gives Wii U owners two options (Wii VC for free, Wii U VC for a whopping $1-2 upgrade) while they give PS4 owners nothing except the hazy possibility of streaming rentals some day.

And what happens when you buy FFIII on a 3DS and you want to play it on a Wii U? You'll have to purchase it again.

I really don't understand this obsession with how the Vita is running PS1 games. It works. They look great on the Vita screen. They're connected to the same store as other consoles and can be played directly from your home screen. Unlike the Wii U, which requires you to make a sluggish journey over to the Wii side of the console to even begin the game and is connected to an outdated store with a precarious existence.

It seems like this debate is bound to go in circles, because we see things differently. I really do not believe that the minor benefits you get from emulating games on a Wii U somehow justify an extra charge or should not be covered under the purchase of the console hardware. VC purchases should be tied to a single account. If a future console can do a better job of emulating the same basic game or offer better features then it should fall under the benefit of purchasing the console itself. Not serve as a justification for charging extra. At the end of the day we're probably going to have to agree to disagree.

 

[radcliff]

Guys I need advice:

How are the NES games emulated/look on the 3DSXL. I have never purchased NES VC for my 3DS. I noticed that on the WiiU they look a little.... blurry?

Go into Wii U settings and change the resolution from 1080p to 1080i. For some reason, it removes a lot of the blurriness. The games are still somewhat dark, however.

 

[Starwolf_UK]

Is the emulation as a whole better on the 3DS than WiiU?

Graphically you have uneven upscaling. While the 3DS screen is the perfect resolution for NES games Nintendo decided to not render the overscan area and upscale the image to fill the space (something like this). This company...its better than 50-hz but ugh why is it so hard for Nintendo to make an emulator to the standard people have peoples have been using for nearly a decade.

 

[Adam Prime]

Graphically you have uneven upscaling. While the 3DS screen is the perfect resolution for NES games Nintendo decided to not render the overscan area and upscale the image to fill the space (something like this). This company...its better than 50-hz but ugh why is it so hard for Nintendo to make an emulator to the standard people have peoples have been using for nearly a decade.

That's a good point. I played Mega Man VC and then back to back went to Kirby's Adventure 3D Classic. There is such a difference, why doesn't NES VC look as good as the 3D Classic? There's a noticeable difference. It's disappointing.

 

[sörine]

And what happens when you buy FFIII on a 3DS and you want to play it on a Wii U? You'll have to purchase it again.

I really don't understand this obsession with how the Vita is running PS1 games. It works. They look great on the Vita screen. They're connected to the same store as other consoles and can be played directly from your home screen. Unlike the Wii U, which requires you to make a sluggish journey over to the Wii side of the console to even begin the game and is connected to an outdated store with a precarious existence.

It seems like this debate is bound to go in circles, because we see things differently. I really do not believe that the minor benefits you get from emulating games on a Wii U somehow justify an extra charge or should not be covered under the purchase of the console hardware. VC purchases should be tied to a single account. If a future console can do a better job of emulating the same basic game or offer better features then it should fall under the benefit of purchasing the console itself. Not serve as a justification for charging extra. At the end of the day we're probably going to have to agree to disagree.

Well, setting aside that FFIII isn't available on either 3DS or Wii U (unless you go into Wii VC, nice of Nintendo to give us that option) yes no cross-buy is a huge issue for Nintendo across 3DS VC and Wii U VC. I've already highlighted that repeatedly in this discussion with you. And it's a REAL issue, unlike the minor Wii to Wii U upgrade fee.

Which I think is sort of why we're going in circles. You complain about the upgrade fee, I point out it's optional and simply adds functionality, you move to other issues, I point out that's irrelevant to the upgrade fee, we go in circles.

Native emulation, new testing, new manuals, relicensing, resubmission to ratings boards, these thing add costs. I don't think a $1-2 fee is a huge issue, and it's optional even as you can elect to just play all your VC games as is anyway. Nintendo's also the only company to allow this, an improved optional upgrade for a fee or the choice of retaining your old games as is for free. It's really one of the few things they've gotten right with VC compared to Sony or Microsoft's retro initiatives.

And regarding Vita's PS1 support, it's worth pointing out it's non-native because it's directly holding back the games by limiting traditional emulation advantages (saving, resolution, filters, etc). An additional downside by integrating with the Vita store is that everything needs to be relicensed and rated, which is why you can't play for example the Crash or Spyro games on the system. It's the worst of both worlds in a way, even though it works. Wii VC also works on Wii U even if it has it's own annoying disadvantages.

 

[Fox Mulder]

Why hasn't Kirby's Return to Dream Land been released on the WiiU when it was in other regions, or was the couple of Wii releases a one time thing?

this is one reason why the VC is a disappointment. Nintendo is just scatter brained and moves on to something else. I wonder if we even get more than 3 or 4 n64 games.

 

[Oddduck]

I'll post here what I posted in another thread:

I wish Nintendo would get their shit together when it comes to Virtual Console games from western third party publishers.

It's unacceptable that we don't have games like Mortal Kombat 2, Doom 64, Quake II, Star Wars: Rogue Squadron, and Shadows of the Empire on the Wii or Wii U Virtual Console.

We're not talking about big western publishers investing in big AAA games for Wii U. We're talking about 20-25 year old games that should be easy money for these companies.

 

[HCgamer]

Is there a way I could download akumajou densetsu legally from the japanese vc to my ntscu wii wiiu or 3ds?

 

[outunderthestars]

I'll post here what I posted in another thread:

I wish Nintendo would get their shit together when it comes to Virtual Console games from western third party publishers.

It's unacceptable that we don't have games like Mortal Kombat 2, Doom 64, Quake II, Star Wars: Rogue Squadron, and Shadows of the Empire on the Wii or Wii U Virtual Console.

We're not talking about big western publishers investing in big AAA games for Wii U. We're talking about 20-25 year old games that should be easy money for these companies.

There is nothing "easy" about re-releasing old games based on licensed properties or from studios that have since gone bhnkrupt.