Free online multiplayer, which will only become more apparently as PS3 losses cross-gen support with 360, PS4, and XB1 all requiring online subscriptions for internet play.
Right now the Wii U is battling the PS3 and Xbox 360 just as much as the other, more powerful next-gen consoles
Yes the Nintendo Network is too compartmentalized and underdeveloped right now, and probably for parental concerns the mic built into the gamepad is boxed off for everything other than Wii U Chat. There's also no party chat even though half the Wii U's (ample compared to PS3 and Xbox 360) RAM is reserved for the OS. But it's still free and better than nothing, with absolutely no catch.
Smash and MK8 will use it but Nintendo needs to push it even further, hopefully the infrastructure can handle it (and without the Brawl-esque lag.) A Gigabit Ethernet port would have been nice as well, wouldn't have cost Nintendo much. The official Ethernet adapter is 15 bucks and is only 10/100 Mbit per second, understandable since it's the same aged USB 1.0 adapter from Wii. Worse than Wi-Fi as are the cheap knockoffs.
That's the reason it's free, a much smaller population uses it.
Sony saw this, once a certain number of people start using your online service, it ends up costing you money. That's why you require a subscription and then offer incentives.
If Nintendo publishes a bunch of online games with large communities, Nintendo will have to find a source of revenue to pay for the upkeep. That will most likely come in the form of a subscription.
From Sony:
"We've built up the network over the years and made a significant investment, and it's quite honestly hard to keep everything [free of charge.] It's a massive infrastructure to run this thing, and now with some of these social features there's a lot going on".
Of course someone will pop in here and say that managing online infrastructure doesn't cost anything or Nintendo is too 'nice', but in all likelihood a much more expansive online network will come at a cost. It's a catch 22 situation.
Of course someone will pop in here and say that managing online infrastructure doesn't cost anything or Nintendo is too 'nice', but in all likelihood a much more expansive online network will come at a cost. It's a catch 22 situation.
I hope nobody comes in here and pretends it costs zero dollars to host and manage the enormous amount of data even Nintendo Network deals with.
That's just it, the Nintendo Network only has to get so expansive, if it's free it'll always have an excuse for lacking features compared to Xbox Live and PSN. You can't have it both ways.
Being free also encourages multiple system owning, which Nintendo needs right now from PS4/XB1/360 owners with their online subs.
These networks are extremely expensive to run and I don't really know why people feel entitled to free online or act like $50-60 a year is far too much for it. But I seem to be in the minority.
Where my friends and I usually get stupid:
https://www.twitch.tv/MUDWALLHOLLER - Come by hang and visit our Discord. The link for Discord is on the Twitch page.
host and manage the enormous amount of data even Nintendo Network deals with.
lol
Anyways, so you want the online service to grow as much as possible without becoming large enough to require a subscription.
Good luck with Nintendo striking that balance.
Umm, read that carefully, even the Nintendo Network, the smallest of the 3 services, deals with tons of data, this is a fact. It'd have dealt with far more if Wii U sales thus far had gone as Nintendo had hoped and expected.
Yes, and Nintendo should too, because the Wii U is the "second system" for a lot of people, including me, and the mic was a built-in cost of the system that's basically useless right now.
If I had to pay for online for the Wii U I probably wouldn't have bothered. Smash and MK8 mean a lot to me.
These networks are extremely expensive to run and I don't really know why people feel entitled to free online or act like $50-60 a year is far too much for it. But I seem to be in the minority.
You seem to have the old Xbox Live on Xbox and Xbox 360 fan mentality back from when Microsoft was the only one charging online. Then I see the first line in your signature...
Steam doesn't, Nintendo Network doesn't, and PSN didn't. PS+ is a good deal though because of all of the free games but it's not a good thing that it is mandatory now.
Where my friends and I usually get stupid:
https://www.twitch.tv/MUDWALLHOLLER - Come by hang and visit our Discord. The link for Discord is on the Twitch page.
These networks are extremely expensive to run and I don't really know why people feel entitled to free online or act like $50-60 a year is far too much for it. But I seem to be in the minority.
That's not too much at all. XBL and PSN are both great values for their prices.
The people that think those subscriptions are too expensive are either 1) naive of how online services work or 2) poor and shouldn't be spending money on games.
These networks are extremely expensive to run and I don't really know why people feel entitled to free online or act like $50-60 a year is far too much for it. But I seem to be in the minority.
That's not too much at all. XBL and PSN are both great values for their prices.
The people that think those subscriptions are too expensive are either 1) naive of how online services work or 2) poor and shouldn't be spending money on games.
Where my friends and I usually get stupid:
https://www.twitch.tv/MUDWALLHOLLER - Come by hang and visit our Discord. The link for Discord is on the Twitch page.
So you guys want to pay $50-60 a year for a slightly improved Nintendo Network and those who'd rather spend that on a game are "too poor."
That is the worst argument I have ever seen, but yeah, attack my Steam example all you want, it doesn't come close to defending Xbox Live from 2002-2013.
In comparison to the other consoles it doesn't. Everything is relative, I could say my cellphone deals with 'tons of data'. Your 'tons of data' value is meaningless.
And yes, you are the sharp one, comparing the operating cost of Steam to XBL and PSN. You clearly have a great handle on how these online thingys work. lol
So far, I'm pretty happy with Nintendo Network. Especially Miiverse.
I'm not gonna pay to play online on a console, if I ever get a PS4 I won't buy a subscription. Multiplayer modes for console titles are usually not that interesting anyway.
And I don't have to pay for the server while playing online on my computer, why would I pay to do so on a console?
@AlexSays, @WhereEaglesDare: Drop it now, both of you. Next one of you to post in this thread something nasty at the other gets banned.
BEST THREAD EVER future of NL >:3
[16:43] James: I should learn these site rules more clearly
[16:44] LztheBlehBird: James doesn't know the rules? For shame!!!
That's the reason it's free, a much smaller population uses it.
Sony saw this, once a certain number of people start using your online service, it ends up costing you money. That's why you require a subscription and then offer incentives..
host and manage the enormous amount of data even Nintendo Network deals with.
lol
Anyways, so you want the online service to grow as much as possible without becoming large enough to require a subscription.
Good luck with Nintendo striking that balance.
And dont forget that Nintendo hates loosing any type of money.
Not fair, Wii U was a loss at least initially and the 3DS was shortly after the price drop IIRC. Nintendo never used to take a loss though, yes, and the Nintendo Network isn't great, but it's free and that's why I like it.
@Phatosaurus: it's been a while since i've used my Steam account since it doesn't like my netbook, lol, but iirc Steam requires you to make at least one purchase before you can comment or chat or anything like that. After they've hooked you with that, they reel people in with fun games and all the crazy sales they run. I know people who own hundreds of games on Steam, way more than they could ever actually sit and honestly enjoy in one lifetime, and they buy them just because they were on sale at the time and the price couldn't be beat.
BEST THREAD EVER future of NL >:3
[16:43] James: I should learn these site rules more clearly
[16:44] LztheBlehBird: James doesn't know the rules? For shame!!!
How many games do they manager servers for, and what additional online services do they provide.
Steam costs a lot less to run. Why do you think Valve gets away with less than 300 employees, while setting a decent portion of them aside to work on games?
When they do have a game they have to manage, they make up the price via in-game economy. TF2's multi million dollar in-game economy more than makes up for the six or so people that work on the game. lol. Then you have card trading which produces another source of revenue.
Consoles have an online infrastructure to maintain with a variety of services, in addition to everything Steam does. Comparing the two is ridiculous.
Forums
Topic: Nintendo Network's greatest asset (no paywall) is under-utilized.
Posts 1 to 20 of 41
This topic has been archived, no further posts can be added.