Stop derailing my thread. Lets talk a solition and possible details this NESflix and how it could work. Im all ears and might be open to another subscription...
@kkslider5552000 TBH I think coffee and VC are purchased in very different ways for very different reasons. I get what you're saying, but VC obviously did very well on Wii, 3DS, and.....that other console. To the point that we all basically expected it on the Switch right out of the gate.
"I've got a bad feeling about this."
Fire Emblem Heroes ID: 6169878641
Animal Crossing Pocket Camp ID: 2267 5362 394
Super Mario Run ID: 7751-0544-7394
Switch ID: SW-2850-4667-2503
With plans to tie it to a subscription model via the Online Network and the sudden shift in plans following customer "feedback", they've hardly "killed" it rather "evolved" it into something different. It does make a business sense as they will want as many people as possible to sign up for the Online Service and the chance to obtain classic games with numerous enhancements will likely entice many to sign up.
Or.......
They could be something that most companies have historically done whenever a new console comes out. Put their resources into making quality new games instead of towards titles that have already been re-released and re-bought multiple times.
I still occasionally fire up the Wii, Wii U or New 3DS to play some classic titles, soon to be joined by the SNES Mini. I don't need it on the Switch just yet. For a platform that has been out for barely over 6 months and has already had several high profile releases from Nintendo, its completely premature to start accusing Nintendo of "killing" a service which frankly has already been offered multiple times as an extra and has already been stated to reappear in a different form in the near future.
A little patience is all we need, I'm sure the new games available now and on the horizon will be more than enough to keep us occupied until we can play Super Mario Bros or Legend of Zelda for the umpteenth time.
Some great points brought up in this thread already, but yeah. Nintendo seems to be going towards the sub service model, which sounds good. Think about it, people were always complaining that Nintendo was too slow with its VC releases, but what if they released a sub service with a bunch of games to choose from at the start, while still adding games here and there? Personally, I don't mind if they don't have the traditional VC model anymore. Between the Wii, n3DS and Wii U, I'm pretty darn satisfied with the VC as a whole.
I think it has just dropped the labeling to distance itself from the Wii era. The Arcade Archives and Neo Geo titles are a VC of sorts, just not categorically so.
I liked the VC for what it was, but I always got the impression that the sales were a matter of diminishing returns for Nintendo and I can see why they do not want to put effort into such an initiative in the present day. What was fresh in 2006 has run its course and people are looking for something new and interesting. It's not enough to just drop Super Mario Bros. 3 again.
I think we'll see more retro eShop offerings if the Arcade Archives sell well, and the subscription service will pick up the slack (those gamers who like the idea of VC but never buy anything when they say they will) in the meantime.
With the incoming impossoble to find SNES classics and next years re-release of the NES classic; Virtual Console is dead.
3DS?
I dont see this happeneing on Switch and a big major reason i play my WiiU a lot. I see Nintendo is making a really questionable business decision by not also having VC on Switch along with these overpriced rare classic systems.
Or they're just waiting to release it when it's ready, just like 95% of their stuff.
I'd happilly spend an upgrade fee for games already owned on my WiiU for Switch. But nintendo hates extra money and/or is just lazy to develop the VC for Switch.
I wish I had a dime every time someone says "lazy".
Truly SAD!
So why did Nintendo kill the Virtual Console?
Did they kill it? I'll prepare the requiem.
Current games: Everything on Switch
Switch Friend Code: SW-5075-7879-0008 | My Nintendo: LzWinky | Nintendo Network ID: LzWinky
To give the 3rd party games - large and small - room to breathe before taking a lot of the oxygen out of the room by selling everyone their 5th copy of Mario 3.
There's been plenty of early indie (& some bigger 3rd party) successes on Switch - those make it easier to secure enthusiastic support from 3rd party publishers going forwards. VC could have trampled those success stories.
@kkslider5552000 TBH I think coffee and VC are purchased in very different ways for very different reasons. I get what you're saying, but VC obviously did very well on Wii, 3DS, and.....that other console. To the point that we all basically expected it on the Switch right out of the gate.
Did it though? If it did so well why are Nintendo-who love making money from recycling their products (and love making money generally)-not flooding Switch with VC games?
I'm personally not satisfied at all with the current VC (no new games save for Pokemon GS on 3ds and that took a year and a half since the last game on the 3ds VC service). I'm not a fan of "subscription" services I pay money for a game and it's mine even if I don't have the sub vs not having the sub and losing those games. On 3ds there's 200 titles split between nes, snes, gameboy, gbc, gba (ambassador exclusive) and game gear. That barely scratches the classic libraries of these games at all. Honestly with the lull in VC over the past 2 years I was thinking they were spending the time to actually get licenses for the complete library and would've started up again with massive releases at once but so far nothing. Do they actually want to make money? I don't think the service would hurt indies at all (news flash if I didn't want to buy the new game before, being denied access to games I would buy doesn't make me want to buy the new game it just means no money going to them!)
No, on a factual level, VC does mean less money for indies. Because people have limited money to spend, and that would change what they use it for for some people. Now, maybe some people haven't bought the Switch itself because it doesn't have that, but I can't imagine after a decade of VC and easy access to the internet, that that number is significant, and I doubt they would refuse to buy it just because virtual console was late.
However, it also means less money towards Nintendo, but **** if that is the key to them succeeding or not. I think they're doing fine right now.
Also, unless some weird thing happens, I feel confident in saying that Wii was the peak of the service for providing a wise variety of games (or at least, it would take a lot of effort, luck and support of even more platforms to even match it). Maybe that will change, but I don't feel a majority of the companies want all their past games released on this type of service (if at all), especially with some of the licensing issues that are frequently involved. Also, SE, Sega and seemingly even Capcom want to re-release games their own way.
I actually tend to be all for making sure games, particularly important and/or well regarded ones, are consistently available legally on current gen hardware, but it's hard for me to be excited about people rebuying LTTP for the 5th time.
The real moral of the story, my friends, is that your opinion is always right and anyone who disagrees is a mindless drone corrupted by the evil corporations who couldn't possibly have more insight than you on what people want.
ThomGee
My Nintendo: ThomGee | Nintendo Network ID: WakerOfWindsHD
No, on a factual level, VC does mean less money for indies. Because people have limited money to spend, and that would change what they use it for for some people. Now, maybe some people haven't bought the Switch itself because it doesn't have that, but I can't imagine after a decade of VC and easy access to the internet, that that number is significant, and I doubt they would refuse to buy it just because virtual console was late.
However, it also means less money towards Nintendo, but **** if that is the key to them succeeding or not. I think they're doing fine right now.
Also, unless some weird thing happens, I feel confident in saying that Wii was the peak of the service for providing a wise variety of games (or at least, it would take a lot of effort, luck and support of even more platforms to even match it). Maybe that will change, but I don't feel a majority of the companies want all their past games released on this type of service (if at all), especially with some of the licensing issues that are frequently involved. Also, SE, Sega and seemingly even Capcom want to re-release games their own way.
I actually tend to be all for making sure games, particularly important and/or well regarded ones, are consistently available legally on current gen hardware, but it's hard for me to be excited about people rebuying LTTP for the 5th time.
That is how the crash in the 80s happened. Everyone was releasing games (a lot not very good). Some indies are good but the vast majority are bargain bin material.
@GameOtaku It wasn't just games, but game systems as well. Without a glut in the game system market, too many games won't do a lot other than make publishers lose money.
ThomGee
My Nintendo: ThomGee | Nintendo Network ID: WakerOfWindsHD
@Nintendoer
Some indies are a big hit do t get me wrong but I'd rather play Super Castlevania 4 than Freddy the Freaky Frogs Racing 9 Xtreme Hop to the Bop. Take for example the 20 or so nes games exclusive to wiiu? Why are they exclusive? None used the zapper like star tropics or double dragon 3.
No, on a factual level, VC does mean less money for indies. Because people have limited money to spend, and that would change what they use it for for some people. Now, maybe some people haven't bought the Switch itself because it doesn't have that, but I can't imagine after a decade of VC and easy access to the internet, that that number is significant, and I doubt they would refuse to buy it just because virtual console was late.
However, it also means less money towards Nintendo, but **** if that is the key to them succeeding or not. I think they're doing fine right now.
Also, unless some weird thing happens, I feel confident in saying that Wii was the peak of the service for providing a wise variety of games (or at least, it would take a lot of effort, luck and support of even more platforms to even match it). Maybe that will change, but I don't feel a majority of the companies want all their past games released on this type of service (if at all), especially with some of the licensing issues that are frequently involved. Also, SE, Sega and seemingly even Capcom want to re-release games their own way.
I actually tend to be all for making sure games, particularly important and/or well regarded ones, are consistently available legally on current gen hardware, but it's hard for me to be excited about people rebuying LTTP for the 5th time.
That is how the crash in the 80s happened. Everyone was releasing games (a lot not very good). Some indies are good but the vast majority are bargain bin material.
That has nothing to do with anything.
Congrats. You must have well told me your opinion on a used car or forgotten 80s commercials for all it matters.
@kkslider5552000
How so? Indy bargain bin titles over classic game titles that are fondly remembered and appeal to the aging fanbase who has been starved for content legally rather than downloading emu and illegal roms?! If they can make money off it why not?
Forums
Topic: ¿Why did Nintendo kill its Classic Virtual Console setup?
Posts 21 to 40 of 63
This topic has been archived, no further posts can be added.