Topic: Should Nintendo do something like a PS Plus system?

I think Nintendo should do it to generate money from "loyalty" fans. This will definitely help Nintendo out but I'm not sure about Nintendo fans and casual gamers will jump in so its may be a bad idea. Hard to say since "Nintendo fans" on the internet don't want DLC and stuffs like that but Nintendo proven that 3DS gamers bought a lot of DLC for Fire Emblem Awakening.

Source: http://game.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/news/20120920_560989.html

I would buy into this if they did... my wife actually asked me when we bought our Wii U if Nintendo had a Plus style membership.

As far as losing your games once your plus sub expires is not completely accurate. I've checked some games i got through PS Plus over the past 2 years ,and some of them have expiration date. I'd say its about a good 10-25% of the games i've gotten through there. This is coupled by the fact that i have actually been able to play them after my sub expired.

Honestly Nintendo needs to learn to do this do a degree. They try all the time to distance themselves from Sony and Microsoft but in the end that's their downfall.

You've neglected to mention the discount PS+ gives on most new releases that you can play after PS+ expires plus you actually don't lose all your games as you can play them once you sign up again and also having cloud saves is useful when juggling games. If Nintendo offered a similar service I would defiantly consider it depending on the price.

I'm not sure Nintendo gets enough games on Wii U to do the free games though. I'm serious, I'm not sure they get enough new releases anymore to do a good job of this. I don't think they want to put all their first-party on it either.

I'm all for a PS+ type system from Nintendo, I've only had it since October and I have easily saved the £40 that it costs for a year's subscription with the Instant Game Collection and the discounts. Even with it being required for PS4 for online, when/if I eventually do get one I'll have no complaints using it. Believe me, the only people who don't like Playstation Plus are the people who have never used it. And yes, you do get your games back if you leave PS+ and come back again.

But will Nintendo ever actually do it? I don't think so. To be honest, the Wii U simply doesn't have enough games to give out two or even one every month for free and still make a good profit. And I highly doubt Nintendo would want to put their first party games, which historically sell well way longer into their lifespans than most third party games, for free.

The majority of PS+ games are ones which are about 6-12 months old which are having slumps in sales. The publishers put them on PS+ for a month, people play them, and the people tell others about it through word of mouth which then boosts sales. Nintendo's first party titles consistently sell well over long periods of time, so they don't need a boost like PS+.

I don't think it will be a good business strategy. For Nintendo, individual game sales are very important. If they start a periodical subscription service, they're going to lose too many sales from people who would rather "wait" 6 to 12 months to get it for free instead of paying full price on release.

Actually if you go read the notes from the investor meeting, they are thinking about doing something just like this. It might not be exactly the same, but they are going to create a service that rewards loyalty and people who buy games on Nintendo systems.

Trust me, Sony and 3rd parties don't lose a lot of sales on people waiting for PS+ free games, and the $50 a year they get helps offset costs. I have well over 30 or so Plus games and a sub through 2015, it's a great program. Most of the games are a year or more old, sometimes we get newer stuff. The best part, as has been said, are the ridiculous discounts plus members get on game sales.

They were going to reward loyal customers by giving them discounts. Not ask people to pay a monthly fee where you get access to games(not actually owning them) and where you get to use online features.

@DefHalan: Playstation Plus is very similar to reward loyal customer services. You don't have to join Playstation Plus after all.

To use all the features of all your games on PS4 you do

I didn't neglect the discounts. It's fine on PS4, because now the entire service is paid, but PS+ hardly makes any sense on PS3.

It's all how they go about the service. Xbox Live offers actually free games and discounts to their subscribers. Since Microsoft has charged for online, the entire time, they aren't in a position to cash grab, but still offer deals. Sony is only offering PS+, because they're losing money.

There's a PS+ "deal" on PSN, where you actually pay more for God of War Origins, and some of the deals save you 30 cents. Not worth it.

Nintendo has the Deluxe Digital Promo, and arguably has better deals on their current indie games, without charging you for said benefits. In otherwords, Nintendo's online store is already better, IMO, and usually has every game as a digital version, which PS3 doesn't.

As of now Nintendo's online offerings are pretty small because well you know they don't put out much on VC so yeah... and their online services are still pretty meh compared to Sony and MS so it doesn't warrant payment. Most importantly people, don't wanna pay for online.

You are the only person ever I've heard say that PS+ is a rip off or that Ms offering is better.... PS+ is the greatest deal in the history of console gaming... I'm not sure if PS+ would maintain its standards on PS4 now that people would be paying to play online instead that for the games but there's no denying the value it has represented for PS3 and Vita owners.... yes you need to keep subscribed to keep the games but even if you see it as a rental is still 4 games per month at 50 a year. If you have a PS3 and Vita and get a $50 one yar PS+ plus subscription you get 18 games immediately to play for the whole year plus 4 more games each month...that's all for 10 less than the cost of just buying and older Wii U Game like New Super Mario Bros U.......

@SCAR392 How does the inclusion of having to pay for online make PS+ better on PS4 than PS3 and PS Vita which have the majority of the deals, I swear you say some strange things.

I didn't use PS+ and I don't think your accusations are correct @SCAR392

PS+ doesn't GIVE you free games. It lets you BORROW them.

It makes more sense on PS4, because now it's a mandatory service. Although you're paying for online, those borrowed games have more value on PS4, oppsed to paying for a few discounts and borrowed games, when you wouldn't have to pay for online, anyway.

That God of War Origins deal is true. Go onto PSN, and you can choose to buy the games separate for $20 a piece, or $30 for both(PS+ not required). The only benefit is buying them separately, but you're ultimately paying more on a PS+ exclusive deal.

I have PS3 and had PS+ for a year to try it. It's not anywhere near the benefits that Xbox Live has provided for years, and the deals that Nintendo has available on their eShop, and you don't even need to pay for discounts and such on Nintendo.

EDIT: By the time I spend $50 for PS+, I can have upwards of 5-15 games that I can actually keep on the eShop. I would also get a $5 promo code, if that's on Wii U.

If I spend $60 for Xbox Live, they give out titles you can keep, occasionally, and there are deals, anyway.

Fine if you want to procrastinate we'll classify PS+ as a kind of rental service which you pay $4.20 a month to access a wide range of games across multiple devices doesn't really change the fact that it is incredible value for money plus getting regular discounts is an added bonus as well as cloud saves. Another thing I have to disagree on is your claim that Nintendo runs better sales I mean Sony's 12 deals of Christmas beats anything Nintendo offered all year in terms of sales also can you expand on why Xbox Live has more benefits because I'm really interested as when I had it and an Xbox 360 I don't remember feeling like I was receiving my moneys worth of benefits.

@Jazzer94
I'm not procrastinating. It's the truth. Those games aren't free, regardless of what anyone says.

Nintendo has better deals, because they don't require a $50 fee to access said discounts. They also offer more recent games. Alot of the games that currently have deals on, aren't even a year old, and you get to keep them by the time you meet that $50 threshold that is PS+.

Xbox Live offered games like Gears of War, Bioshock, Mass Effect, Kinect games, etc. for much cheaper than their original price, and that arguably wasn't part of what being an Xbox Live member is about.

I got a Kinect game for free and I saw tons of full Xbox 360 games for WAY cheap, some of which I mentioned above. Microsoft also has more games on their Xbox Live store, IIRC.

I have to admit, that I haven't been on Xbox Live Marketplace in a while, but PS+ was a way to offer what Xbox Live arguably already was.

http://www.xbox.com/en-US/live/games-with-gold

See, you actually get free games witj Xbox Live Gold. PS+ just lets you borrow them.

Every single store has discounts. That's not really a paid service. Things end up dropping in price anyway.

For example, I bought AC on discount on the PS Store, with PS+. The price dropped after a couple of weeks, anyway.