Topic: The Nintendo Switch Online Subscription Service Thread

I'd like to point out that Sega Genesis Classics has been on Switch for years and has over 50 Genesis games. On top of that it does support online play via the basic Switch Online subscription.

Just to prove a point, I have Sonic 1 on Dreamcast, GameCube, GBA, DS, Wii, 3DS, Wii U, PC (Steam), mobile, and Switch. Most game systems after the year 2000 has Sonic 1 in some form.

Even the few N64 games I like, I already have on my Wii U. I even have Star Fox 64 on 3DS.

This is why the Expansion Pack doesn't feel worth it to me at all, I have other ways to play these games.

@Matt_Barber
I still don't see how that makes it a bad precedent. It puts a bit of a question mark on future value for sure but that's not really the same thing as a "bad precedent". When you think about it, funcionally, a free game you have zero interest in playing is as much value to you as free DLC for a game you haven't brought

Its not worth it but joining a family group eases the cost with the same benefits. We’ve had this discussion for the past 3 years and I’ve always used family groups to split the cost. I have 3 spaces if anyones interested

@skywake
You and many others forget that the VC games went on sale quite regularly so you could purchase games cheaper. VC would end up cheaper in the long run especially if Nintendo would use the account system in place to its fullest.

There should be more options. Why lock this sort of content behind a online gaming paywall? I’ve reiterated time and again I don’t play online “period”! I’m sure I’m not alone in that boat. Even if I had internet at home online gaming is not for me. What I am interested in is games I missed out on in my youth. The VC on my 3ds was a godsend. I was over the moon with excitement for the retro offerings on the switch to be the same way. This just makes me so mad!

Except they didn't. There was the 3DS Ambassador program, the early adopter discounts on WiiU, the Wii -> Wii U "upgrade" discount and I believe a referral program on Wii where VC games was the reward. But other than that, nope.

@skywake
Yeah they did. Quite regularly the 3ds VC. I purchased several at very cheap prices.

@GameOtaku I can second this, as I've bought a few 3DS VC games discounted (Sonic Blast and Super Mario Land 2 stick out), and on Wii U, I got Super Mario Advance 3: Yoshi's Island at a discount.

These were regular sales. In recent years, VC games really do not go on sale on these two, while other games do.

@GameOtaku
Well lets flip this around, if you were buying that many games on the VC that you were more aware of discounts on releases than I am? You were probably spending more than the cost of NSO on those titles. Which would by definition make the VC model a worse value. And if so your disagreement with the subscription model is not a rational one

It's true. Vc games as well as actual 3ds games were discounted quite often. Either on a regular sale or through platinum or gold coins.

@skywake it really is a case of which do you prefer, so I don't think either mind set is incorrect. However, for me personally, it made much more sense to spend more on VC titles in the long run than NSO for a yearly sub since I actually get to keep the games. What good would it do if I end up actually loving banjo and don't get to play it next year when if I don't resub? Again, I don't think either mindset is wrong in the discussion. I'm just more into the 'buying the games outright' mindset than renting them.

@NintendoByNature And how many of those VC games do you still play today? If you do still play them frequently, then good for you and owning them outright is clearly much better. But for me and I think probably most people, we play a game once and move on, so it doesn't matter if we don't own it anymore. And as I have said before, I would clearly PREFER owning it outright, but ultimately it doesn't really matter. But as you rightly said, neither way is inherently better. It depends on who you are and how you play, and I play many more games through the NSO than I ever did through VC because I never wanted to waste my money on a game that I either had already played a million times and could get any number of ways (the Marios, Zeldas, etc.) or had never played but did not know if I would like. Now I get them all.

@NintendoByNature
I forgot about the platinum point discounts. Either way it wasn't really a major part of the service. At least not until the dying days

I guess my question on your second point though would be why? If you agree VC ultimately cost more, which it did, how is it a better value? Why does "owning" the game matter? This is a media where selling off your collection once you've finished is a part of the culture. Why should you be afraid of expiry?

Just buy a year if and when you think it has enough value. Then let it expire once you've had your fill

Edit: clearly I'm not the only person with this view

Just to add on to this as I think people are forgetting this; games like Banjo and the genesis games are here due to licensing agreements. What happens when they expire?

Sure, they could renew the license, but will they? What happens when the 3rd parties want more money? Will the price of the subscription increase to match? Or what happens when the 3rd decides they have a better service for their games? What then? It's not like you will be able to play them in that instance.

At least with virtual console, you owned the games if you brought them even after they are removed from the store, a la Donkey Kong Country on the Wii. And that is a Nintendo game for crying out loud.

@Xyphon22 to your first question, mostly the Zelda games and a handful of mario ones. The 'now I get them all' is a fair point for sure. And that's one of the bonus' to having NSO.
@skywake I think your question of why again points back to my earlier point. Neither mind set is wrong. Value is a subjective thing. What's more valuable to me is having games I'll be able to keep forever( pending my system doesn't crap out). Sounds like a subscription rental service is more valuable to you, and there's nothing wrong with that opinion, or mine. Some would rather rent and pay less, and some would rather own and pay more.
The answer to your other question is, for me, a simple one. Having a game I can jump into at any time I want, is a huge bonus. For instance, I can still jump into games on my nes, snes, genesis, gameboy and 64 all these years later. Games nintendo doesn't even have available for purchase. Had I rented these 25+ years ago or had a subscription, I wouldn't be able to do that today.

I hope you guys know I'm really not trying to argue or anything like that. Nor am I trying to change your mind. There's something for everyone and I just happened to be on the other side of the fence for this one.

I'm with you on preferring to own games than having a subscription service, @NintendoByNature .... Although I don't replay most games, there's some I do
At least with, say, GamePass, you can try all the games & if you like it enough even after finishing it, it's also available to buy

@BruceCM there ya go. That's a great point.

Especially for NSO, as I don't subscribe, @NintendoByNature .... Guess that makes me biased, lol

That’s what I meant in my original post. If you want the DLC and plan on using it throughout the whole year, this is a good deal, but I don’t think too many people would use the DLC for that long. Although, I’m now realizing if you bought the DLC by itself, it wouldn’t really matter how long you used it for. So, yeah my math was wrong. It would be a deal if you didn’t use it for the whole year.

@NintendoByNature
I'd argue that technically one of our mindsets is more correct than the other. My point is more that you're giving way too much weight to the risk of losing access to these games. Your fear of dropping the subscription and losing access to a game is larger than the additional cost of buying these games one at a time.

Your example of being able to still jump on your Gameboy and boot it up to play games on it is nice. I still have my original Gameboy and SNES with a small-to-medium collection of games. But if I was honest with myself? They're display pieces and at this point so is my Wii and Wii U with all the VC purchases I made. I don't play games on them and haven't for years. Do I like knowing that I could? Yes. But I don't

There was a pretty good video on this a few years back. Not for game subscriptions but the psychology of loss aversion:

Well, I never had the Nintendo consoles before Switch, only a DS & then 2DS, @skywake .... I usually trade in most physical games after finishing them but there's some I played several times before doing so
As for NSO, I thus have no nostalgia for the games in that now or that'll come, so that makes it not worthwhile to me