Topic: The future of our VC collections (and the nature of the Wii Shop Channel)

Although it clearly states in the terms & conditions on nintendo.com that we are NOT actually buying anything other than a licence to play these games, I often wonder if Nintendo will be respectful of our investments and allow us to carry over our VC collections on their next gen console (and no I'm not talking about the 3DS). This worries me because I have an exceptionally large collection of VC titles, as I was a huge fan of videogames in the '80s and early '90s. I fear that Nintendo (which let's face it makes a substantial amount of earnings repackaging and selling their franchises) will require everyone to buy the same games. Although I can't tell the future, if this happens I for one will never buy a Nintendo console again.

I understand it costs Nintendo money to emulate these games and get licences and rights from third-party developers and so forth, but I don't buy it when all NES games are 500 pts, SNES 800 pts, & Nintendo 64 games are 1000 pts. If we truly are paying for the licence and not the game, then there shouldn't be a concrete discrepancy between pricing for all games, especially if they're first-party Nintendo games. I understand they're a business and I don't mind chipping them money, but I suspect it didn't cost them much to port their NES, SNES, and 64 games.

Plus, the pricing differences create the illusion that we're actually paying for something, instead of buying time to play it. If they were more forthright about it, and created a montly subscription service to play unlimited older games that was activated through an account rather than a console, I wouldn't even have a complaint. Look at Netflix, with their low subscription fees (I pay 10.00 dollars a month) they take up 20% of the bandwidth in the USA (i.e. they're rather successful).

But by naming the service the Wii Shop Channel, and charging for individual titles, they are implicitly creating the impression that we ARE buying something tangible for our money. I mean, I don't go into a shop to buy "time" to use a product, I go into a shop to purchase a product and whatever time I put into it is up to me. If they had set up a flat rate to play unlimited games, I think the service would take off more than it has, but they're thinking old-school and making a lot more money (or so they think) by creating the "illusion" of ownership.

Their policy of keeping the VC downloads console-exclusive (to prevent game sharing) has already cost them money from me and countless others who wanted to buy a slick new black Wii, but were told in no uncertain times that Nintendo doesn't do licence transfers to new consoles, only if one is damaged.

Yes, I've heard in one or two instances that someone had purchased so much content through the VC that Nintendo swapped their collections, but for all the reasons I've stated above this almost feels to me like them throwing a loyal customer a bone for being such a "good" doggie and paying so much for these games individually, although the terms of the service make this completely irrelevant.

And those terms will keep them safe from any class-action lawsuit, and they know this, so the deception continues.

It's not like it would be hard to swap it to accounts, as they're aware of our purchases if we have a Club Nintendo account that's been linked through the Wii Ship Channel Options Menu. They have all the resources to do the right thing, but it's left to be seen if they have the heart.

If they handle this well, they'll cement my faith in them as being as loyal to their customers as we are to them. And I would like to believe Nintendo will do the right thing because of the backlash from the first DS downloable service fiasco.

If gaming companies show faith in their consumer base, they will secure long-term sources of income from happy customers. It's like when Radiohead released 'In Rainbows' with the option to pay what you want. Although final figures were not disclosed by their record company, they DID let it be known that they made money. That option DEFINITELY doesn't apply to the VC (nor should it), but I used that story to illustrate what happens when a respected entity (like Nintendo) puts faith in loyal customers.

That's why it's such a big deal to me in the first place; a big enough deal that depending on how Nintendo handles this in the future will influence my decision to ever buy from them again.

Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice...

I don't think that will happen the amount of hate nintendo would get from that would be huge they just can't afford to lose that much reputation if you need further proof Nintendo are allowing users to transfer thier DSiware games to 3DS (come may) and the DSi ware has been a far less profitable survase.

I treat VC games as a rental. The date I have to 'return' the games (i.e., lose them) may be this year, years away or may never happen. I won't know until it happens. Because of this I want to get as much playtime as I can with the games I enjoy playing. Just so that if I do lose them, I can say to myself that I got my money's worth in the time that I had them.

Of course I will be buying future Nintendo consoles whatever happens. I don't want to have to replace my Wii and start again but I will if I have to. Obviously I won't be buying my entire VC collection again. Just a few titles that I quite enjoyed playing but many I would not download again.

If I can't transfer my downloaded games to the Wii 2, then I'll just have to keep my Wii 1 around for when I want to play my downloaded games.

I don't get this. The games will be on your Wii until your Wii dies. It's the same with any console...as they die out, the console itself will become rarer, that is why the VC exists to an extent. Retiring your retro consoles is always inevitable to do...the VC just let's you hold onto them until that Wii dies...which I hope will last longer then my Mega Drive.

Borrowing them would mean you pay for a set time, this isn't the case as you can play them offline and if you wish to, never turn on the online ever again.

@ Starlight

You're talking about physical games made specifically for the Wii. For them to treat releasing digital virtual media like traditional purchases when they CLEARLY INTEND not to is a HUGE MISTAKE, and will only lead to more piracy. When buying an actual Wii game, if one console fails you can buy another one and the same game works on it; not so with the VC releases. That was the beginning of my entire chain of thought, Starlight.

The thing is, corporations don't have much trust for their consumer base, as they have teams of lawyers, so on so forth. We're seeing this more and more frequently: remember the DRI scandal that rocked UbiSoft?

I kinda figure, if they were kind enough to let us transfer our DSiWare to 3DS (which could be easier, admittedly, but at least their letting us do it), why wouldn't they allow us to transfer our VC and WiiWare when the next home console launches?

The Future Will be full of ShovleWare!

_{it has been written}

figured I'd point out to you guys what I think nintendo really mean by the whole "buy the license to play" kinda thing, it ties into piracy; one could argue that stealing a download is ok since it is an intangible product; its not a object or anything you can hold or take physically. so by lisence to play nintendo really means "lisence to have so long as you don't sell it to anyone eles";

my reasoning may be a little confusion but rest ashured I believe our virtual console games (and wiiware while I'm at it) will be safe.

Just because a new console comes out doesn't mean you can't play you're Wii. I'm not concerned about this at all. Though it'd be nice to have everything on one console, it's not going to be huge deal to me if I can't. Heck, I even fire up my old gamecube sometimes to play my GBA games on my TV.

Besides, I think they will have to let us move games to the next console. Nintendo would get a lot of hate if they didn't. It just doesn't make sense not to, especially since they have this feature for the 3DS.

Interesting.

I myself was just thinking about stuff like this the other day, and found myself digging through some terms of use. I don't own that many VC games, but there are quite a few I would like to have, and many I would outright purchase if they were ever released. I understand the whole point of this service isn't to provide us with great classic titles, it's to make money. I also purchased what few games I have knowing that I would never technically own them.

I think how Nintendo handles having the Wii pass the torch (so to speak) will decide on whether or not I am a purchaser of their next console. If their next console supports the VC, I better be able to transfer all my purchases for either free, or a couple bucks. If I have to purchase them all again separately, then I definitely won't be buying whatever that console is. If it doesn't support the VC, then it is a different story all together and I hope they at least allow the Wii+ it's online services to stay afloat for years to come.

There's nothing wrong with being a business who wants to make money, as that's how you stay a business. But I think when you blatantly express far more greed than value for your customer base, you deserve to sink. I love Nintendo and hope they never turn to that.

Actually we DO own our software purchases - digital or otherwise. Consumer rights outweigh any crap about "just paying for a license" - these are products, plain and simple. We're spending our money in the assumption that the game is ours once that exchange has been made. They can only claim the software is licensed if, upon purchase, it says the software will expire on a certain date. They can't just suddenly say "actually, you can't have that game any more" - the exchange has been made, the game is yours and any lawyer would back you up on that.

A new console is a funny thing, though. They can simply claim they don't want to make it compatible with those titles and start an all new Virtual Console - you'd still be owning your game on your Wii you see. That'd just annoy a lot of people, though, so it's unlikely to happen as I see no benefit to their business that way. I mean they didn't need to make the Wii backwards compatible with the GameCube and make us all buy Twilight Princess again, but they didn't as it shows a bit or respect to past customers.

I think it's very likely the successor to the Wii will allow you to transfer your old Virtual Console library. Although don't start believing that you're just "paying for a license" to play these games as that makes you a fool and you'll be treated like a fool. Spreading that crap around the internet just hurts consumer rights.

Does anyone care to explain to me why... instead of purchasing software directly, every console manufacturer instead has their consumers add funds to a separate wallet or covert payment to their currency first.

What I mean, instead of paying $5 directly for a game, I either have to buy $5 in points or place $5 into a "wallet"
Nintendo to Wii/DSi Points
Microsoft to Microsoft Points
Sony to Wallet

Don't get me wrong, I know about the financial advantages to this, especially when you need to buy points in certain amounts, but besides that, I'd like to know if this gives a legal advantage to those corporations. I'm not an Ace Attorney, could they get away with saying consumers didn't buy the games, that they just bought their funny money? Does that matter or change anything?

I think that they will have a procedure implemented to be able to successfully transfer games from Wii to Wii2. I don't think they will do it through Club Nintendo however, as in Australia (not sure about Europe or anything), our purchases are not recorded. As such, I think it will involve some kind of interaction with Nintendo (which kinda sucks but there is nothing you can do about it...
)

You will have to buy them again im sure. People buy new models of dsi etc so nintendo knows that people will pay again and you will.

I would never pay again, there will always be another competitor out there that will offer a (repeat service)... Otherwise I would just emulate - I'm pretty sure if you have a game you can emulate and it's not illegal...

Not this lawyer. I don't like to lose.

Incorrect. Though a very common misconception.

Right I'm predicting the worst because the Terms of Service and Nintendo's track record with the DS has more than proven their willingness to make you pay for content already purchased. That's why if I saw Nintendo do something so against type (in the business sense) and extend the collection as is on the next home console and allow transfers, I would be surprised, and definitely more loyal to the brand. The VC's the best gaming on the Wii, and for me arguably the best gaming available on all current consoles. My argument is based on compassion to fans like myself who show up in droves again and again to buy iterations of the same franchises decade after decade, to see something unprecedented. If you want to beat emulation, you need to take some risks yourself. I'm no lawyer, far from it - and legality is not synonymous with justice - so I think the Big N will be working against themselves and the tide of history by discontinuing popular online programs and not carrying them over to new consoles. This would really put Microsoft and Sony in a bind, as such large companies could NEVER do something so daring and not in line to pure profit. I know my argument is naive and more idealistic than realistic, but I still have faith in Nintendo because that's the same position they took in developing the Wii after the comparitive failure of the Gamecube - they basically kept the same engine, added motion controls and on-line, and gambled on gameplay over graphics. While Microsoft and Sony laughed, the Wii won out early on for being more idealistic in 2006, and I think decisions like this will either help or hinder the future success of the company.

i believe that you will be able to transfer VC downloads onto the Wii 2. If you can't, then I will be very hesitant to buy the Wii 2 as the VC was my main reason for buying the Wii. I'll just enjoy the many games I have downloaded onto the VC on my original Wii and move on to a Sony or Microsoft console.

I see what you mean...but at the same time physical media can be just as unreliable as digital downloads...for one thing...a digital game can be redownloaded as many times as you want as long as the Wii you have it on still plays fine...if not? Contact Nintendo and demand they switch it to another Wii, it's not hard. Whereas a broken physical game is gone forever, and that DOES require a re-purchase out of your own pocket if you so wish.

I understand where you are coming from from a standpoint...but at the same time many people have realised the disadvantages of buying games digitally...has it stopped them? No it hasn't. Will people still moan about it? Yes, they will.

As long as people keep buying Digital Media as a way of getting these games easier, the same people shouldn't moan what happens to them in the future (as long as they got their value from it, I kind of contradicted myself in the next sentence)...it's like moaning about renting a movie and saying it sucked (but people pay for it as they don't want to pay double the price if they owned it in case it DID suck).

I will admit that a transfer option is definately needed, as after all...keeping customers keen is a priority to companies...and taking something away which the consumer already bought fairly is clearly a bad move.

Anyway, piracy happens whether this service gets used or not...it is usually the physical stuff that is pirated anyway...this only helps the ones who made the game get more money out of us and sort of tells pirates to either go on the PC and emulate or buy it just so it's on the TV. I personally perfer my TV for gaming then a PC....but that's personal taste.

I've been thinking about this a bit and I really don't think anyone (games/music/film) is going to be able to control digital media in the future. It's obvious DRM just pisses off people who buy the software legitimately and sets up way more restrictions than people who simply pirate it. I can't think of a solution to this problem, but piracy has to look like the least attactive option.

With DVDs and retail released games, you always got your legitimate copy with nice packaging, resale value and a good overall quality product. The only reason you know you have a legitimate digital release is because it has a ton of restrictions on it. A purchased release needs to be worth the money - at the moment it is not. I don't pirate anything, but spending all this money on digital downloads for the same software over and over is beginning to wear me down now.