Topic: Do we really need a new console on NSO?

@Matt_Barber I think the reason why we're seeing more GC ports now (and discussion) is that Nintendo focused on the WiiU library for a number of years, which made sense given the number of people who bought a WiiU and the quality of the games.

@Bolt_Strike That's a strong argument against GC ports, but the counter is that the Switch (and hopefully its successor) are so strong that a relatively unknown game can sell 100's of thousands or millions of copies.

Take Wave Race: Blue Storm, if that was ported with enhanced visuals and had some good marketing the customer base on the Switch is big enough that Nintendo may see it as low risk and an opportunity to test the water on bringing back an old franchise.

That's a heck of a lot to be extrapolating from just five releases this year, only a couple of which Nintendo were directly involved in.

Also, Nintendo were mostly done with Wii U ports by the end of 2018 and we've only had them at the rate of around one a year since then. Given that the Switch has also been seeing enhanced ports of Wii and N64 games at a similar frequency, I don't think you can infer much of a strategy at the moment, at least not beyond them wanting to cherry pick an assortment from their past for the remake treatment.

Whether we need a New console that is one's choice to make not for Nintendo. They either upgrade or fall to the wayside of power Hunger GPU games. They don't get a choice here and people make the Biggest FAIL here - they lack the mindset that to keep going you need to update hardware. Imagine your still driving a Ford Model T and you like it-(Auto collectors excepted here). I doubt anyone in 2023 will do that on regular basis so why would you think Nintendo being doing that in 2023. People need to get off - Social Media and smell the fresh oh wait polluted air - to see life isn't all about ScreenTime.

what

maybe I do need to log off…

Anyways, randomness aside, we don’t absolutely need more consoles on NSO, but it would be nice. The bigger games like Metroid Prime and Mario Galaxy absolutely needed to be upscaled and ported to switch since the Wii U and 3DS eshops shut down. Seeing as how Nintendo prioritizes money over what people want, despite the people saying “nintendo doesn’t like free money” when (insert GameCube game or any Zelda game not on the switch) isn’t on switch, they would make more money from HD ports and remasters of GameCube games because they will sell well individually at 70 or 40 dollars US than as part of a 50 dollar total NSO package.

Hundreds of thousands aren't really enough for Nintendo, they want to see millions for it to be profitable. I don't think they're confident enough in some of these IPs like F-Zero and Wave Race to reach that threshold even with the Switch boosting sales. It's not as safe a bet as you think.

And the smaller games? That's the problem with relying on remasters to re-release games from an old console, you only get the handful of popular, high selling titles from that console and the less popular ones fall to the wayside. People keep asking for F-Zero, for example, but that hasn't cracked 1 million in sales so it's a risky choice for a remaster. I personally want to try Wario World but that didn't sell much either. And Alex Olney has a soft spot for Doshin the Giant, but again, not a high selling game (although I don't think it got a lot of marketing, I had never even heard of the game at all until Alex posted an article about it) that Nintendo would want to remaster, so that's also a game Nintendo isn't going to want to remaster. NSO is a much better outlet for testing the waters on some of these niche, forgotten games and IPs.

I would like to see DS simply because VC finally opened those games up, Gamecube to me would be to be fair but honestly I prefer remasters instead and feel many games that players wanna see won't go to NSO due to licensing anyway. Other than that I am happy with the mix of NSO and collections. I don't think Nintendo is going to attempt a VC type scenario unless they can put it as a stand alone sub like MS and Sony do to cover licensing fees. But the draw to NSO for me is that the games don't cycle in and out (and the DLC access). Nintendo is still playing the observation game, as they add features to their own program they are likely looking to see how much PS and Xbox will push. However we are never going to a perfect solution. So I just try to maintain old hardware.

Honestly the more I've thought about it, the more NSO's bizarre, often underwhelmingly slow release schedule makes sense to me. At least when you take three major, likely things in mind:

1. Nintendo wants new releases to be used as a reminder that they have a service for X console, thus another reason to get NSO. Unless they want to have their marketing people spend more time marketing pre-existing games (which they already do for their actual new releases anyway), that's the easiest way to do it and also make those services not feel abandoned (because I can't imagine they think obscure 3rd party NES games in 2023 will sell NSO).
2. It would cost money to get more 3rd party games on NSO, a lot of which not interested for whatever reason (probably Nintendo not forking over enough money combined with not wanting it to get in the way of their own, newer re-releases), so a lot of the library is in limbo or just not gonna happen.
3. The team to work on the emulation is probably not that big. See: the state of like half the N64 games at launch and the slow drip of games on that system since.

Combination of those three means it will generally take ages to get a large quantity of games people want on it on any one system, but there's always justification to add more systems because that's another piece of nostalgia to sell people on (there's likely not one specific game that alone would sell NSO more than the vague hopes of an entire system's library (and some of the most obvious games that could possibly come close they try to get around launch)). Doubly so if (presumably) Gamecube eventually ends up being another tier to pay even more money for.

The entire thing has made most of my takes on NSO nowadays be that it eventually is a good service, in a way. But its taken its sweet time. (they announced 9 more N64 games a year ago, we still have 2 to go!)

But the point is, there's no chance they'll get every exciting, popular, well liked game on one system before they focus on another one, if they ever do at all.

The answer is yes we need more and that will be the answer until they are all available.

@Ryu_Niiyama Was going to point that out, I just miss the VC in general, I hate that Nintendo takes an eternity to release retro games on their systems for the millionth time. On Wii U the DS basically came out towards the end of the Wii U's life, it feels like they might do the same on Switch.

sighs

Then the Switch 2 will happen and it'll be back to just NES and SNES for a couple of years again...and still no return of the VC.

The DS is a system that only worked as well as it did on the Wii U because you always had two screens available, and the GamePad shared the same resistive touch screen technology.

On Switch though, you've only ever got the one screen, touch input is capacitive and somewhat less precise, and there's no touch input at all when docked.

In spite of all that, it might still be possible to get a lot of games working after a fashion via emulation, but anything that requires stylus controls and/or the use of both screens at once is going to be far more of a candidate for an enhanced port.

I can't fathom that this would happen. If NSO games are in any notable way locked to ONLY the Switch and not the next system, it will immediately be one of the stupidest things Nintendo will have ever done.

@kkslider5552000 ....This IS Nintendo we're talking about. >.>

It's Master System and Game Gear time! Stick Atari Lynx on there along with PC Engine, too.

Oooh, they should do Game & Watch as well. That would be awesome.

GC games will be selected sparingly and sold separately. Please enjoy.