Topic: Is SNES Online Dead?

Herein lies my issue with it. As of now, and since launch, it's an afterthought that serves only to have a minimum as incentive to keep people subscribed to the extremely lacking Online service.
I'd pay far more a month for a true retroFlix service. Access to a large library of all kinds of games, including third party. The games wouldn't be 'free' as they'd be part of this service and not sitting in the eShop next to new titles. As a full fledged service, it'd get more attention and being a service, maybe have some older rare gems that can't hold their own on the eShop.

@Cotillion Hard agree. I'd welcome a retro games subscription service independent of NSO. If not, increasing the base cost of NSO in favor of broad improvements to it is a good alternative; maybe payment tiers.

@Gwynbleidd
Not sure if I'm getting you right, but are you a little mad that you can't use the games if you no longer sub to NSO or if they end the program? I'm with you on that sentiment if that's the case. Unfortunately, 2 of the 3 "big three" do it that way. Microsoft is the only one that allows you to keep your Gold games even if you end your subscription.

Nintendo had a nice chance to join Microsoft in making the games permanent on your console even if you cancelled your subscription or for the day they end NSO and/or Switch service. It would probably mean a lot fewer SNES games, or maybe even certain bundles you'd have to choose from. I couldn't see them giving you 25 SNES games upfront for 20 bucks, no questions asked. But even if they gave you access to all of them as long as you have an active sub, and then choose five per year that you'd like to download to your console for good, that would've been a nice move.

@Gwynbleidd
Ah, yea.

It's a good question why they got rid of the VC stuff basically. I'll be honest, I wasn't a big VC guy. I have maybe a few games across my 3DS/Wii U/Switch, but I was never big on buying old games digitally. I'd prefer to just play them on the actual systems with the appropriate controllers.

I think Nintendo felt pressured to have some sort of game offering with NSO because MS and Sony do it. But I don't think they wanted (or could) to do the 2 free games a month. Can any of us ever see Nintendo giving away one of their 60-dollar games for free? lol So they'd pretty much be doing little indie games and people would trash the service even more than they already are.

Yeah, you're looking at it wrong. I think whatever way you slice it it's still a pretty decent value compared to previous offerings by Nintendo. I don't remember the exact pricings but from memory they charged $6AU for NES games, $9AU for SNES and something like $15AU for N64 on the Wii VC. Then there are the mini systems which work out to be something around ~$4AU per game when you exclude the controllers.

With NSO you're paying $30AU/year. Over the life of the Switch that's probably going to be around $150AU. There are around ~60 titles on NSO quickly looking at the list, about $2AU per game if they were to stop releasing games for it now. And this is before you consider family groups, voucher discounts, other titles like Tetris 99 and anything else they add going forward.

Now I have no doubt that overall Nintendo intend to make more money by having more casual users pay a subscription. Also it's fair to say that subscriptions mean they're getting a regular stream of income. But really, despite the "in principle" whine from people who want "ownership" of their digital goods? For more dedicated fans the Classic games on NSO alone is an insanely good value compared to previous VC offerings

We shouldn't look back on the VC fondly in terms of "Nintendo's behaviour" when comparing it to NSO. If I'm being honest with myself, if they had an old-model VC on the Switch I would have spent a good $50AU on it already for a tiny subset of the selection they have now. Ontop of that I would have happily paid $30AU for Tetris 99 and I saved ~$10AU with a voucher compared to discounted retail pricing.

I think this goes deeper to a rethinking of the concept of "ownership." With the rise of streaming (though Stadia's launch isn't looking so hot; maybe we're still a bit away), I think we're going to see lines blur even more.

It's already obvious companies don't want to do physical releases anymore. It costs them more money. Digital is the way, and if they can further lock you in with some kind of subscription, they can guarantee themselves money rather than rely on X number of people buying a game.

Do you really get games for free on PSXbox?

I thought you get locked out of access to all the 'free' games if you don't pay the monthly membership?

@SKTTR
On PS Plus you can't access them if you let your sub lapse, but for Microsoft you can play them offline.

I let my Gold sub go a couple years ago and I can still play the games I got.

@rallydefault Thanks for the information. I wasn't sure. Good for XBox fans though, they seem to get the best deal then, with Nintendo coming in second.

@SKTTR Nintendo doesn't come in second by a long shot. You dont own NSO ROMs after your membership expires. PSN is the same, but its current gen games, then you get into the actual service itself.

I don't see why people are making a big deal about buying SNES games. Even then, if it isnt physical you don't own it. Just buy a SNES classic and hack it.

Digital has far more ownership than the service. The VC games I bought will be there as long as the system works and I don't get rid of them (and even if I did, games are still available to download to those who previously bought them even after their removal from the shop). In terms of that and longevity, you more own a digital copy whereas service games are gone whenever the provider deems it wants to remove them or shut down the service.

To be fair, the lack of ownership works both ways, and people are willing to download a game for themselves, regardless of what Nintendo wants. :V

If anything that's more of an issue of newer games and online games, since there's more reason to believe you won't be able to own those games. Or at least, less people will be able to.

@Cotillion
Well, to be fair, you're kind of half right. Yea, any digital games you purchase and download will be on your system as long as the system works and you don't uninstall them. BUT, if you do uninstall or the system stops working or whatever, you can only redownload games for as long as Nintendo keeps the eShop ecosystem going. Effectively for as long as Nintendo "allows" you to keep redownloading the games. I know it seems nitpicky, but it has happened with some Steam games, for example, when they are taken off the digital store for whatever reason.

@Trajan
But I also completely disagree with you. NSO is easily the "second best" option of the big three and it's mostly because of the low price. My PS Plus sub (had one until last year) didn't offer me anything more than what NSO does with the caveat of SOMETIMES getting a "better" game of the month (though let's be honest, lots of months go by on Plus and Gold where nothing that good is offered for the free games). I'll take the solid lineup of NES/SNES games over maybe 1 or 2 games a year I may enjoy from the other services for a higher price.

I use the cloud saves for Nintendo but that wasn't a deal maker/breaker for me. Online games in Aces, Kart, Smash, SMM2, etc. have been mostly fine for me. I do get some laggy ones every now and then, but it's not to a frequency that has me crying foul.

PS Plus/Gold deals, however, do have NSO beat. Nintendo needs to offer more frequent NSO-only game deals for like 20% off or whatever. Even if they only do it at holidays or seasonally.

@rallydefault If we're not counting steam NSO is easily 4th place, right behind Seganet from 1994. Your games preference is a personal choice. I personally don't care about games that I've played 30 years ago and already own. Even Nintendo already sold me those games with a SNES classic. Any games that are missing I can add myself. Meanwhile PSN gives me current gen games that Switch only people are asking for and willing to pay $60 for, like Borderlands.

Cloud daves are nice, but Nintendo wont even let you back up your games locally. To further add insukt to injury they won't even allow cloud saves of many first party games.

The actual online service is a joke. Switch isn't capable of running two applications at once so no parties, which is essential for playing with friends online. No communities or forums like the other services have either.

Then you get to the actual horrible online. Terrible netcode coupled with a horrible Wi-Fi chip.

Nintendo has in the past openly admitted they didn't care for online. That still shows. But hey, people are paying for it, so good on them. Don't hate the player hate the game.

@rallydefault Has that happened with Steam games? I have some that were removed from the shop for various reasons and no one can buy them, but I can still download them.
It's still not the same as owning a physical cart, no, but it's a lot closer to ownership than a service will ever be.
Owning a physical cart now even means less than it once did, given how many games have DLC, patches and whatever. Granted, owning the base game, bugs and all, in the future is still better than nothing.

Oh, right, Switch comes in 4th. Sorry.
1. Wii U had the best online experience and it was free (with native Voice Chat, and native Video Chat, and creative forums aka Miiverse).
2. Wii had pretty good online and it was free.
3. Xbox One's free games don't expire after quitting online membership.
4. Switch has NES and SNES classics that you can play online for the first time ever and Nintendo adds brandnew games for the service like TETRIS 99 and Super Kirby Clash)
5. PS4 online membership costs a lot, and access to "your" "free" games is denied if you don't pay up. Plus you don't get brandnew games for "free", only older games.

Wii u had free online. It had call of duty. And it had native voice chat.

@Trajan
Too much to even respond to, and I'm not gonna waste time to copy/paste respond to individual things. Your opening hyperbole also kind of ruins any good points you may have made afterward.

Games preference is subjective, as you said, so there's that argument tossed. But if you can't be real enough to admit most Plus/Gold free games are indie bargain bin or year-old AAA stuff everybody already bought, I don't think I can take anything you say seriously.

As I've said, my online play experiences have been majority very good, and I didn't buy an ethernet adapter or anything. Just going off the included wifi. I'm sorry your experience hasn't been the same. You do pass yourself off as a net code expert, though - is that your line of work? If so, can you go into more detail about what's bad with Nintendo's net coding? Thanks.

Your argument about not being able to download your own cloud saves is valid. For people that may be important to, that's definitely a lacking feature.

I didn't know PS Plus and/or Gold had forums. For some reason I don't think I'm missing much, though.

NSO is 2nd best online service for me, no question. If we're gonna include Steam, Steam would be the best just because it's free and does what it needs to do. That's kind of my view on all this stuff.

Are you joking. I'd gladly wait to get next to free year old AAA games. I mean arms, Kirby, 1-2 switch are all still full price! Yet alone Botw, Mario, and Kart.

@rallydefault I don't know why youre being so aggressive. Chill out.

Yeah it has year old AAA stuff. My favorite this year is Wipeout HD. Meanwhile NSO is 30 year old games. So... How is that better than 3 year old games? And pointing that out means you cant take me seriously? Are you serious? If that is your point you are the most delusional fanboy.

Your entire argument is "I like NSO so its superior", when the facts point to that not being the case.

Yes NSO has rather poor netcode. Hence why everyone complains of stuttering lag. Quite a few number of people claim to not have had an issue. That's cool. But a lot have. Its not even just your connection, since everything is P2P it means everyone elses internet is also an issue.

If you like it, that's cool. But there's no need to lie and say it's better than anything because it objectively is not.