Soapbox features enable our individual writers to voice their own opinions on hot topics, opinions that may not necessarily be the voice of the site. In today's article, editor Dom discusses the hot topic that is Nintendo Switch Online and why every online service starts out with a few teething problems...
So lets talk about Nintendo Switch Online. With Nintendo offering a little more insight into the ins and outs of the service ahead of its September launch, the response has been, to put it mildly, mixed at best. Charging for cloud saves? A paltry selection of NES games? That flippin' app! There's been a fair share of negative comments made about the new online infrastructure - including from our very own community of readers here at Nintendo Life - so I felt it was time to address the issue in a little more detail.
Here's the thing - every online service has to start somewhere, and none of them resemble the state they originally launched in. When Xbox Live appeared with the original Xbox back at the start of the '00s, it was just a basic service designed to take advantage of an online community that hadn't truly formed yet. By the time the service was rebranded as Xbox Live Gold, most of the features that has once been free - such as playing online and storing saves in the cloud - were now locked behind a paywall.
Was there a backlash? Of course. Sony didn't charge for the privilege of access online multiplayer on PS3, even when it launched PS Plus in 2010. But by the height of Xbox 360's dominance in the previous generation, Xbox Live offered a more robust and reliable online infrastructure than the one provided gratis by Sony. With the likes of Halo and Gears of War, Microsoft charging for the service made sense - and this was long before it started the Games with Gold initiative.
Yes, it's frustrating to go from paying nothing to access online features to suddenly having to cough up a subscription, but we all knew that Switch was unlikely to spend its entire lifecycle without some form of revitalised infrastructure. New features and improved utilities don't often come for free anymore, and with Nintendo also including a selection of NES games as standard, a fee is hardly a shocking request to make.
So what about cloud storage? That's a topic that's got some serious gears a-grinding. Having to pay actual money for the privilege of storing game saves in the cloud? It's an issue that's split gamers for a long time. Microsoft used to limit the feature to Gold members only back on Xbox 360, but eventually extended the service (and the amount of space) to all users. On PlayStation 4, cloud storage is still baked into PS Plus so you'll have to pay for the power. Considering how we've all had to go out and by bigger and more expensive MicroSD cards to hold our digital games, the introduction of cloud storage is a welcome addition, even if it does come with a price tag.
Which brings us quite nicely onto the subject of cost. Honestly, Nintendo is charging well under the price points Microsoft and Sony are peddling right now. It costs £5.99 for an Xbox Live Gold membership and £6.99 for the same amount of time with PS Plus. NSO only costs £3.49. And yes, that price could go up, but Nintendo is still launching a service that offers more content and features that are close to - if not on par - with its 'competitors' for a price that's half that of PS Plus. And we're still moaning? Come on now.
The issue of games is perhaps the hottest issue at the heart of the Nintendo Online service discussion. Not just because of the choice of games, but for what it means for Virtual Console as a whole. And while the 10 games that the service will launch with are hardly revelatory, it's hard to not look back on the early days of PS Plus and recall how it used to offer nothing but demos and PS Minis. It took a long while before the likes of Mad Max and Bloodborne got the 'free game' treatment.
It took Sony years to embed PS Plus, to prove its place in a changing market and use that exposure to negotiate deals with publishers and developers around the world. Nintendo has an impressive back catalogue to draw from when it comes to the launch months of NSO, but that doesn't mean this selection will be the same in 12 months time. Just like how a PS Plus slot helped turn Rocket League from indie curio to global mega hit, there's the exciting potential for the Games Collection to become a launchpad for Nintendo's growing relationship with its Nindies.
Then there's the issue of Virtual Console - or the noticeable lack thereof. As frustrating as it is - we've all sunk a lot of time and money into VC re-releases - Nintendo has clearly decided to move on. Switch represents a turning point for Nintendo, so a move away from the VC model that served 3DS and Wii U so well (okay, mostly 3DS) was bound to happen. VC became an authentic link to Nintendo's past, and one that enabled us to play some of the best NES, SNES and Game Boy era titles on modern machines, but every service eventually evolves into something new.
Losing that long-serving brand name is a bitter pill to swallow, but Nintendo is unlikely to effectively ignore its own legacy. We just have to accept that the popularity of miniature consoles with built-in games has produced a real money maker for Ninty, so the potential for future retro hardware releases will likely affect how Nintendo treats 'classics' as part of this ongoing service.
Ultimately, NSO is a natural next step for Nintendo and Switch, and while paying for what was once free (and still currently is) might seem irksome, remember that Switch has operated without a paywall on online multiplayer for 18 months by the time NSO launches. We'd much rather pay a small subscription fee and enjoy a more robust service that will no doubt grow over the years to come, than stay with the limited free version we have now.
So what do you make of Nintendo Switch Online and new details that have emerged regarding its pricing and features? Share your thoughts with the community below...
Comments 232
the 2 sticking points to the service is again NES games, we dont want them, we dont need them.
for the other part is the cloudsaving behind the paywall.
both sony and microsoft give the option to backup for free, its kinda bad for nintendo to force us to get the online so we can save our progress and that doesnt even count for every game.
ugh.....
edit: dont even get me started on the atrocity that is called the switch online app.
the price is fine however, that is the only positive thing about this service, that and special (hopefully good) discounts
I’m all for giving things a chance, but Nintendo’s track record with this sort of thing is mostly atrocious. It’s not too hard to understand the negativity. I’m hoping for the best, however, and I definitely appreciate the lower price.
Expecting online on Switch to be free forever is naive. The online on previous consoles was compromised because it was offered for free. Paying a small fee will likely result in a more robust experience. And it’s not bad value for money. The NES games sugar the pill a bit. And everyone has been after cloud saves for some time now.
The problem is why is Nintendo acting like all these other online gaming options don't exist and starting from scratch? I mean would we be cool with a company releasing one of those early bag cell phones in 2018 because it's their first phone? Or would we compare them to what's available in 2018 and laugh?
One of the costs of maintaining an online service is server maintenance. With that includes the computers, the hard drives, the electricity, the network servers, the rent for the physical locations where they're housed (some may not be on-site to a Nintendo office), not to forget the people needed to monitor them. All that is an ongoing cost. And if Nintendo's serious about improving the online performance, y'know for less disconnects and server-side lag, they'll need to add more servers and facilities to a degree they haven't had to deal with since the Wii days, even more so because so many games available have online modes as a major part of the experience. Everything's more expensive now than they were 10 years ago. Nintendo needs that performance in order to gain the trust of new customers who need that performance for an enjoyable online experience.
@superguy123
That's exactly what I was going to say. How can you compare Nintendo's cloud storage thing with Sony's and Microsoft's? You can backup save data at least in some way for free on both their systems. (Unless I'm missing something. Feel free to correct me if I am.) Paying for cloud storage would be a complete non-issue for most if Nintendo let players backup their save data to an external drive or SD card.
@ottospooky
You always paid for online as part of the game fee before. And yes, I do expect online on PC to be free forever for the majority of games since peer to peer networking doesn't cost the company any money other than the initial matchmaking code. That's also what Nintendo is utilizing and why I wouldn't expect the online gaming to actually become better.
@rocky2418
its a way to get more money tbh.
back on the 3ds save data was saved on the cartridge, not on the system.
i am sure nintendo couldve done that with the switch, but the main problem would sadly be easyier exploitation.
its a sad state of affair for now, unless nintendo redeems themselves as they did say they havnt been saying everything yet.
cloud saving is great though, especially if they do it based on network ID which would allow you to acces save data on all switches as long as you log on there.
The free games don't sound so bad...if the whole thing was not rigged to give us scraps in the next couple of years and call it a day. I mean, It took Nintendo a year and a half post-launch to have a system ready with whooping 20 NES games ready, 20 of the oldest most re-released games in history.
It is hard to believe that they could release many games for other systems (SNEs or N64 to begin with, which were available on the Wii launch day BTW) in the 4-5 year average console lifespan.
The only legitimate complaint is the voice app, which is terrible. The service is cheap enough that complaints about the cost carry no weight. I know some people argue on principle that cloud saves should be locked behind a paywall, which...wait, which principle is that, exactly?
Well, this is a community that argues "on principle" that the skimpy outfits on underage girls shouldn't be altered, so the phrase doesn't seem to have much meaning.
I'm ok with it. Will be getting the $35 family option. Doesn't have every single feature I want but it works for me. Having cloud storage and easy access to some of the best games ever made works for me. In obviously in the minority but I don't have any issues with it over all from what we know. I'm optimistic it will get better over time too.
@Dr_Corndog
People should own their own save data. Does that mean that Nintendo has to offer a cloud storage solution? No, it doesn't. But it is pretty bad that Nintendo doesn't let you back up your data leaving this as your only backup option. It is literally the only home console that doesn't let you backup your games unless you pay them extra.
For the cost I have no complaints it's decent value. I am disappointed that the retro games are limited to NES only but I expect that this could change over time.
Even if I only played mk8d or splatoon2 online amd BoTW the online gaming and cloud back up seems a steal for £18.
Some people's expectations seem unrealistic. It's the start of the service and it will evolve for sure. I'm not unhappy with what we know so far.
The only thing I don't like about the setup is that it seems to be somewhat of a replacement for an actual Virtual Console setup.
Looking at the success of all the other retro releases already, this system was absolutely perfect to be the one and all retro gaming setup, yet we seem to be getting something highly toned down from Nintendo themselves. Which is an incredible disappointment, unless they have something else lined up that's even better than the old VC setup.
At this point, it's kinda doubtful. :-/
I never used the virtual console so I cannot comment on it. However I feel it would be hasty to judge the service based on the first details. It will improve in time.
Personally, I'll give it some time to mature. I can't speak for others and will refrain from trying to legislate and change what others feel or think. Its a tiresome endeavor. I personally will give it a chance at the fairly reasonable price.
@Rocky2418 Cloud saves are free on XB1 and paid on PS4, think there's a local backup option on PS4 though.
I'm glad they kept it simple so they could keep the price down. I'm not throwing anything to the wolves over £1.50 a month.
Nintendo will probably have a long term plan and invest the subscription revenue hopefully into their infrastructure. I just hope the game apps are worth it.
I'm splitting the family option with 7 other people. The cost per year is insanely low if you're able to split them with other people.
Dang, ppl are really serious complaining about a service thats 20 bucks a year......
Thats like 2 indie games....
Nintendo can do whatever they want with their online service, and they can give it the price they want I don't care. They must give free alternatives for saves backups at the very least.
I don't care if they charge 3.49£, 10£, 150000£, 1£, whatever I will not pay it anyway. They can put in it all ther discounts they want for the subscribers, I don't care. I'm willing to pay full price for everything I want that is fair to pay, so basically everything EXCEPT saves backups (local saves backups of course, I don't ask for free cloud space, Nintendo can keep its precious disk space I'm not gonna ask for it).
The problem here is that Nintendo is taking away functions and contents that should be available for everyone. Having cloud saves in this service is not a bonus for the subscribers because there is not any alternative for other people. Subscribers will get just the most basic functionalities of their console, not anytrhing more, and non subscribers will get even less. Non subscribers should get the most basic option and subscribers should get something more but Nintendo this time forces everybody to have less than they should. This "service" is just insulting for us.
@Santaman64
Send me $20 a year and I will agree with all your posts. You can't complain about that service because it's only $20 a year.
Edit: I decided my terms were too generous. So I changed them to I'll agree with one of your posts annually for $20/year. But still it's only $20/year so you can't complain. I'll be waiting for my check.
I appreciate the optimism, and while I don’t the the online system is horrendous, I still think it’s meh. I think it’s fair to be critical on it even now because Nintendo has had multiple systems/generations to give us a proper online system, or at least learn how to make one.
It’s like the boy who cries wolf at this point. Hard for Nintendo to try and convince me they got online right.
In all honesty, for just cloud saves and a few NES games that we never get to officially own or buy down the road (unless that changes) and just a few discounts (which knowing nintendo, they won't be that great), it something that neither of us should even pay for. With discounts and the few games, have it to where we just set up an account and add everything that nintendo would want. With their lag in online support and the bad online service they usually bring with the games, I don't see buying another internet service from a game company. The only thing I saw worth it with the PS Plus, was the discounts added up to the price (and the discounts on games were really nice during flash sales), other than that, you still never owned the games, but could play them for as long as you were a member. I never was a Live Gold member, except for a few days, but I never liked that because they made it to where you 'had to be' in order to enjoy netflix, where Playstation allowed you to be able to use it no matter what (just needed internet). I hope nintendo doesn't go this route if they put Netflix on the Switch, but who knows. I may try a day on the Switch's service, as long as it turns out to be worth it, but other than that, I'm not a member of any game service, so this is probably another thing I'll shun away with, and I don't agree with any game company making you pay more for a service (aren't the consoles, controllers and accessories high enough).
Stixming point is starting off with 20 nes for 20 bucks is pretty groovy. I want them. Dont need em but thatll be gran all the same.
Dont get the conplaints. Dont know why people expect Nintendo to ever do anything comparatively to Sony and Microsoft.
A constant slew of nes games is cool.
As far as voice chat goes im really glad Nintendo makes this so hard tp use. I cant stand playing any online game that encourages chat. Nothing but racists playing online and always make that clear. That made me stop plugging in my headphones when playing COD on xbox360.
Getting sick of the argument that it must be good value just because the competition is more expensive. If the setup is truly comparable, then that just implies the competition is overcharging - but everyone accepts it as norm, so normative it becomes.
“Crime stats in our Town are half that of your Town, so it’s okay that we still have a lot of crime” said no police commissioner ever.
That being said, £17 a year does seem a reasonable price to me. I just hate hearing that argument.
@cleveland124
I understand it is still money, and maybe how one values the amount is different from person to person. So if i hit a nerve, my bad.
But, if 6 cents a day is too much for online service, no matter how basic, then maybe this is not the hobby for everyone.
And ill sent ya the 20... just post ur bank account, routing number, ssn.... lol. J/k
@Grumblevolcano
Yeah, that's how I understood it to be when I did a quick search regarding the PS4 and XB1. So yeah, at least some way to backup saves for free on both. Nintendo really needs to at least do that.
For a start you can't compare this to the early days of PSN or Xbox live as those were new gaming services in general. Nintendo has had the benefit of watching from afar for a very long time and to then come up with something that isn't up to that standard is a bit silly.
That being said for £18 there is little to complain about apart from the abysmal way that voice chat is handled and I'll be subscribing immediately to back up data and play Mario Bros 3 😁
@superguy123 Sony does NOT let you cloudsave for free. You have to have an active PS Plus account to access this feature. So same thing nintendo is doing.
Nintendo had a chance to catch up on a decade of technological lag by finally introducing a much-desired achievement/trophy system to the Switch. -That- would have made the service fee an understandable addition.
Once again, however, Nintendo has proven that they’re out-of-touch with the gaming community and have no problem being a decade behind other gaming platforms.
@Santaman64
Wait, are you critically evaluating a product you expect other people not to? I mean I didn't think the actual services provided mattered since it was only $20/year.
So I should go watch paint dry if I don't want to spend $100 for online over the next 5 years for literally 1 game for me right now (MK8)? Yeah, that's not condescending at all. I mean if you think the value is there for $20/year great. But don't go around telling people what they should spend $20/year on something they don't think is worth $20/year please. That doesn't make you a likable person.
I don't mind the NES, what I do mind is we can't buy them or keep them if we decide to cancel services. That's just stupid.
@dragoaskani I think he's probably referring to usb backup on the ps4 which of course is free.
My only question is about the family plan. I have a feeling it is based on up to 8 users on 1 Switch and not 8 separate Switches. I need that to be clarified by Nintendo. Other then that I'm ok with it. I prefer the free current version, but I'm ok with renting classic NES/other games for $35 a year if the over all online experience continually improves.
@cleveland124
Thats not what i was saying at all. Chill, u blow that waaaaaaay out of proportion.
But how about this. If 20, is it too much to try the service (since none of us here have actually used it) then ppl can pay 4.00 bucks try it for a month, and of they dont like it, cancel. Less than a meal, at most places. And you got a month of 20 games for the cost as well.
@Dr_Corndog I was honestly agreeing with you until you were comparing it to the people who are against censorship, where you even only show one extreme of. In the first place does censorship not even have anything in common with being against a online service and it also is not like that censorship only happens in gaming.
On topic, I think that most people saw it coming that Nintendo eventually would also ask for money to play online like their competitors. I am happy that they don't go over the top with the service so that the price is rather affordable.
if im gonna play online or backup most of my games. than, yes i do need to use this service.
on a serious note, i'll keep a close eye on more details.
@redd214
Exactly. And that's something Nintendo doesn't let you do. So not the same thing Nintendo is doing. They're the only ones who don't provide some way to backup save data for free.
Wait, I don't get it, people were expecting Cloud Saves to be free from Nintendo's first online outing? I'd imagine the infrastructure was quite expensive, and Nintendo is loss-leading with their noteably low prices. It's a start, as was said in the article.
Cloud backup for Switch migration shouldn't be charged for and should be a free service. To use Online access and storage that should be part of the fee they charged. Since they provide on way to backup your data should you upgrade your Switch or replace it this should be a Service Free of Charge provided by Nintendo Online. Everything else they can charge for.
The biggest issue is not being able to copy save files and that you have to pay for having the only backup option that is available on Switch. Best online services are offered by Microsoft, with Deals with Gold every week, a few free games per month that are not from the 80s, optional Game Pass with new first-party and third-party releases and free local and online save files backup plus cross-save. Sony offers a watered-down version of this (worse servers, no Game Pass and no free cloud saves) while Nintendo will give NES games, fewer online games, not integrated communication and no local or online backup saves unless you are subscribed to what seems a relatively very expensive service.
@Galenmereth good to know. thank you
Hm...
For Super Mario Bros 3, i can depend on the Remake version (All Stars edition) on SNES or Wii or i can consider the GBA version.
I agree to give Nintendo a chance , they are charging very little for this service so if you don’t want to risk paying £18 you could always try a month to test it out . Barely any cost risk! It’s time they move on and this is a great way to start by charging very little and sweeting the deal with some nes games which aren’t just nes games they’ve been enhanced for online play so your not just getting mario for the zillionth time ! And while virtual console maybe over that doesn’t mean it won’t be rebranded into something else , Nintendo is hardly going to ignore the goldmine that is there back catalogue
@dragoaskani
wasnt talking about sony having free cloud saving, sony has a solution where you can save data backup via an USB.
My biggest gripe is that it took too long to come out. If the service had launched alongside Splatoon instead of Smash 5, I wouldn't feel slighted. Mario Kart and ARMS definitely both have online components, but Splatoon's definitely Nintendo's most online centric game. Playing it for a year and then getting slapped with a paywall shortly after a major paid expansion comes out is a slap in the face
@Santaman64
I'm not upset with you. Sorry if I was a bit pointed. My point was a product should always be compared with it's price/value and that will always be different for everyone. FYI, I own every one of those NES games. Most on multiple systems so the NES rental adds no value to me.
Yes, I waste lots more than $.06 a day on various things. But that doesn't mean I should make the next bad purchase because I've made previous bad purchases. The daily cost is the car salesman technique though. So props to you for turning it into a what can you afford thing. Did you know that when Warren Buffett splurges he spends $3.17 on breakfast? Good financial habits start somewhere.
The issue I have is what happens when Nintendo Launch a new console and we are left with a Wii similar issue buy you games from the Wiishop before we CLOSE IT DOWN I have little newphew & nice's still playing the Wii So if Nintendo can close it's shop with all the retro games on it what's going to happen with all my saved game data once Nintendo decide to close off the its servers. On this matter Nintendo has a bad record. Microsoft at the moment I trust with my game data they seem to get it right (my opinion) of cause I will sign up to Nintendo yearly subscription but I'd rather have GameCube games than old NES games
No gripes here. $20 a year is so cheap! I'm down!
I didn't realize there was anything to complain about, but I guess I am not really looking for anything from an online service except the ability to play online. My save files work fine on my system and have for many years on other systems, so not sure what the big deal is with cloud saves. Voice chat would be nice, but even on other systems a lot of people prefer to use Discord or whatever anyway. And the NES games aren't all great, but several are classics that people still go back to decades later. I know I will be playing a lot of Dr. Mario, especially if you can play online.
So the company you’ve loved since childhood is now asking if you’ve got 20 bucks for them. They’re getting older, a bit crankier and just need $20 from you. What the hell, just give it to them. It’s $20, that’s easy to forget about and Nintendo goes on and lives another day
The problem with cloud-save only is that knowing how Nintendo shut down online services as Wii, Miiverse and I guess that Wii U soon, Switch cloud-saves will probably be shut down when Nintendo is busy with anything else. If older Nintendo consoles had local saves backup options, there's no reason why Switch wouldn't.
Switch is a hybrid system which many people play as a handheld so requiring a mobile phone and additional wires for communication makes no sense, it's clunky.
@Dr_Corndog yeah that’s my biggest problem as well. The NES games aren’t the best and they could have at least put up to SNES on there but whatever. For the price it’s fine but the voice chat thing just isn’t on. If you are providing a free online service then fair enough you can offer no voice chat etc but once you start charging online membership you have to provide basic communication. It’s utterly ridiculous that you need to use your own phone for this.
I'm just happy to have cloud saves. Backing up saves one by one manually is an excruciatingly painful process anyways, I seriously doubt most people did it on 3DS, or even Wii U for that matter. I know I certainly didn't.
Never did like the phone app though. Since I'm not really big on voice chatting anyways, it's kinda hard for me to convince myself to care too much. Although I would have appreciated it for Monster Hunter Gen Ultimate. At least for my brother- but we can just call each other and use speakerphone anyways.
Don't care too much about NES, but it's whatever. I'm glad to see Super Mario Bros 3 at least.
Come on now, for £18 this is a fantastic service.
I’d predict the majority of Switch owners have no idea what cloud saves even are. It’s only in the rare case a Switch breaks or gets stolen that it’ll even occur to many that it’s even an issue. If you lose your saves then either start again or move on, life’s too short to get upset about a game.
The people that care about cloud saves are the people that will happily pay to play online, and the people that will enjoy a Netflix style access to a classic library of games.
Imagine how fun it’s going to be when a new game is added, and the whole community is playing it together, competing for high scores. With virtual console there’s never a big wave of enthusiasm or interest for some niche NES game.
It is only $20 a year!! That is a bargain compared to Xbox Live and PS subscriptions at $60.
Free online forever is unrealistic (servers cost money).
My issue is that I only play local co-op or single adventure games... should I cough up $20 for cloud storage... hmmm.... 150 hours of zelda botw... DARNIT ... probably will. LOL. Again... only $20 a year.
Having never experienced the virtual console I'm really excited about getting free NES games and hope that it expands into SNES and beyond. Playing Super Mario again is going to be cool and bring back lots of good memories.
There's still no way to back up saves. We should all hope nothing happens to our switches before September. That 100 hours you put into Zelda just disappears if something happens to your switch. There are lots of people who have had this happen to them. Switches break, some of them ship with defects. My first switch had a faulty fan and overheated. I lost my saves and had to start all my games over again. The problem with the paywall is that there's no other way to save games (like to the SD card!). This shouldn't have taken so long in the first place. Again, all your saves are vulnerable right now. I'd pay now to be able to save to the sd card. I'd buy a proprietary Nintendo SD card if it let me back up my Zelda and Odyssey saves right now, but I can't.
Why does it seem like Nintendo starts their online services from scratch with each console? It's cool to have 20 NES games with online features added, but nobody's really happy with that right? Sure, if we compare it to early online services from 2002 it might seem somewhat comparable? Are they going to slowly release just a few more NES games each month, maybe get to SNES games in 2019. Maybe we will get something we're all happy with by the time the next Nintendo console launches and then we will have to wait a year for them to start this cycle all over again.
@Captain_Gonru You missed what the article really left out, MyNintnedo.
This entire article is written under the assumption things will get better, what they announced doesn't matter - "every online service has to start somewhere". Well how often have we said that about MyNintnedo over the past year? Nintendo replaced a decent Club Nitnedo w/ MyNintnedo. It was late and delayed about a year and launched around the same time as the Switch with very little Switch support. And over a year after the Switch launched there is still very little Switch support, 1 cent per 1 point, whoopee.
So I don't understand why anybody would think this would get better. When does anything ever get better with Ntinedo? Wii U was launched with the promise of Gamecube VC and Dual Gamepad support, both of those were officially coming, but never did. Switch games were "Coming Soon" to MyNintnedo for months.
If people want to argue whether this is good or not as it stands, fine, to each their own, but expecting things to improve considering Ntinedo's history is just naive. If anything it's likely to get worse before it gets better.
Sigh...
It's the thin end of the wedge. The cost will rise to beyond the initial £20 before long with numerous packages for different gens of games. All this has done is reinforce my reluctance to join the digital revolution in games. What Nintendo should have done is suck up the minimal cost of porting over virtual console games and straight up allowed their loyal customers to carry over games they have already paid for. Had they done this I would have had more faith when buying digital games, as it is I have now completely given up on buying digitally as I know I'm essentially renting games, not buying them.
It's not the minimal £20 cost that's the issue for me, it's the process of luring in the customers to a subscription system that will gradually rise and offer no more than we already had and have already paid for numerous times that annoys me. The majority will go along with it regardless and Nintendo will make a killing.
The only way I would have been happy with a subscription system is if I could still play the games I've already paid for online, such as Splatoon 2 and Mario Kart as well as the basic online functions in games that require them in the future, but the subscription was a choice that offered me a wide selection of games that I could decide if I wanted to sign up for or not. Instead we are being forced to pay more just to have the basic functions of games given back to us.
I can't believe anyone is conplaining about this... At $20 a year the cost is only $1.67 per month. If you get the family deal and split it between 8 people, the cost per month is $0.37 per month. You're getting 20 NES games with brand new online functionality, with the promise of more to come, but people are still complaining. Absolutely ridiculous.
The classic games are worth it alone to me. Sure they're games I've already owned a few times before, but this time they are both portable and console versions in one, and I'll be able to play online with my friends and family across the country. I just hope they also give us SNES, N64, and Gamecube games with the service and add online to those as well.
Can they just let me pay for a way to play more of the classic games. I wasn't able to buy a nes classic. I'm still trying to buy a snes classic. I don't want to buy these things from scalpers. I want to play these games on the switch. It's not about the money! It's about the waiting!
Don't tell me what to do lol!😛
does any one know if you have the option to just buy the games
if you want to?
@Old-Red Here's the thing though.
Yes Nintendo will make you pay to play online.
Why wouldnt they when they see consumers on Xbox and PS have been doing just that at far higher prices for 5 years to over a decade, and not doing so is just leaving money on the table?
What can be leveraged as a complaint against one is against all.
It's nice and all Nintendo is trying to give us a online service similar to the big boys but I'm no apologist. It's 2018. Certain things are standard by now. In 2006, we different standards for an online service on a console. 12 years later, messaging and universal voice chat among others, is STANDARD. Nintendo can't be held at a different standard because this is their first shot at this kind of service. It was supposed to launch last September but it got delayed a year, and honestly, I can't see why. Nothing really changed about the service in that year so I am baffled. Previous Nintendo systems had messaging (one tied to an app on 3DS and the other on a dead web browser for Wii U) and now we are taking a step back. Also, there really is no point the friends list on Switch. It serves a way to add people you know to play certain games online with but THAT'S it. Nothing else. In 2018. And the fact that Nintendo is hush hush about everything they are working on including this service, is a tad disheartening. Especially when the Xbox division at Microsoft in recent years has taken fan feedback so seriously. The system is frequently improving because Xbox communicates with the players and fans. Nintendo, has much to learn. But then again, they always have
This is still how I feel about the paid online service
@YummyHappyPills
Two wrongs...
Also, to add to your point, yes the other companies have been charging more for the past five years, but Nintendo has still come out pretty well overall. A lot of that is due to the fact that they have done things differently and people like me have left Sony and Microsoft because we were fed up with the all the extra little costs of just being a gamer in general. The fact that Nintendo offered me games complete on release without annoying extra little costs here and there is the main reason I've been happy to stick with them the past 5 or so years. I want to pay for a game, enjoy it and that's that. I've got no time for companies that want to 'be a part of my life' and tie me down to subscribing to them on a long term basis. As a customer I want the choice of paying for something and walking away with it in my possession.
Nintendo didn't get to the healthy financial position they're in by copying other companies. Doing so now could turn quite a few of the faithful away.
First, to get this out of the way: I have absolutely no problem with the pricing. For what Nintendo is offering with NSO, plus the fact that dedicated server space has to be paid for somehow, it makes total sense. I expect the price to increase at some point, but I would also expect the NSO services to be improved and added to as a result.
My two main sticking points are the following:
1. Virtual Console/Retro games: This is less of a problem of what the online service is offering initially and more so with how retro titles may be handled from here on out. I don't like how these will be tied to NSO and thus stuck behind a subscription paywall; I'd personally rather buy and permanently own a few retro games that I really want without worrying about a subscription. I feel like, once you buy a game (even digitally), it should permanently belong to you to boot up and play whenever you wish. A subscription model takes away some of that freedom. I feel that this is less of an issue with games that don't take that long to complete (SMB, Balloon Fight, etc.), or else are tests of skill more than game progress (League of Legends, multiplayer-centric games). But if I plan to spend hours on a game and invest my time into it, I'd rather permanently own it.
2. Save backups. First, I have no issue with cloud saves being part of the online service. I think it's a reasonable perk and, again, takes up server space. The sticking point here for me is that there's no way to back up your files locally (for free) on your own media if you wish; I've read Nintendo's reasoning about why this isn't allowed, but I feel like that reasoning is archaic. Honestly, if someone wants to pirate any software, they're going to find a way around this. I have multiple backups of my 3DS's SD card sitting around, and while this is less useful, I also have aspects of my Wii U's contents backed up.
Again, we may not know the whole story, and some of these concerns may be premature. I don't dislike NSO, but I feel like more information is needed.
@Old-Red My complaint with your comment wasn't that too wrongs make a right, nor is that the competition charges MORE:
It's that you complain specifically about Nintendo doing this, yet how can you leverage complaints at one for charging for online but not the others?
@cleveland124 I get that, but like I said, $20 a year for the privilege (and more besides) is not worth getting upset about.
@YummyHappyPills
Because we're talking about Nintendo on a Nintendo fan site. I don't like the practice in general and that's why I don't have a PS4 or XBOX 1.
20 bucks. For online and free games?for a year? I'm down. I'm not even mad a little bit.
The reliance on the smartphone app and NES games are a non-starter for me. They could have at least gone with SNES and GBA games to start with.
@superguy123 I Want and Need NES games.. 😊
“Nes games we don’t want them we don’t need them”
Lots and lots of people want them and would pay for them. I’m fine with them being in this service and at 1.50 a month....
No wolves needed.
Perfect price point for a service that will grow and be even better.
Either way I can’t wait for it to launch.
More Mario titles on the switch the better
Fine - But lets not pretend that there not tons of problems. And pointing out where Microsoft and SONY were over a decade ago is irrelevant. Hire modern people who know how it works in 2018 - and have them build it.
The chat App is awful at home - it is awful on the go. Using it is not worth anything a month. Put chat on the system.
I've been backing up my data on a USB for ages - I never take it out...nothing to do with PSN+. Give local save - online back-up should be Optional. Backing up a save has nothing to do with online play!!!!
I got RIME (and Grand Kingdom) for free on PS4 on PS+ this year. Always was curious - already got $29 savings out of it. I can play NES games on my phone - Never do. They can give some of the smaller Indie games instead.
oh here we go again with the whiners and complainers. even if Nintendo shuts down the console. the cloud saves will be connected with your id, not with the switch. that is why if you lose your switch and get another one, you will have the advantage of cloud backup. 20 bucks is nothing compared to 59.99 a year. plus you start out with 20 games that you can take with you anywhere vs four games a month from xbox live or ps plus. Nintendo will also put out more games. do not be surprised, if it is from other platforms as well. some individuals like voice chat, I do not care about it, that is why I have no problem with it. They say that Nintendo is behind the times. there is no law that says that because of what other systems did before. if that was the case, then other systems are behind the times because the hottest system now is playing console games at home and on the go.
"Let's Give Nintendo Switch Online A Chance?!"; What Chance?, really almost everyone already began to despise it and still there are time for its arrival..., oh well...
"Before"?; Too late, really, too late...
"We Throw It To The Wolves"?; there were no other options for contempt ...?, oh well...
Well, sigh..., continue with your complaints and whining ...
When Nintendo confirms there will be no Virtual Console like previous generations many people acted like this was actually a good thing. They're saving the indies, nobody would buy this if SMB3 was available for $5.99! Who needs Virtual Console anyway, it's just a bunch of moldy oldies that we've paid for dozens of times over!
Now they're giving these same titles away for "free", with online support, in a ever revolving library of titles. The same group of people celebrating the death of the normal VC now rationalize that dozens of free VC games with online play won't "hurt" indie sales, and everyone's chomping at the bit for Clu-Clu Land online.
@superguy123
""the 2 sticking points to the service is again NES games, we dont want them, we dont need them.""
Ok, very interesting, but curiously when nintendo mentioned that there is no virtual console in Switch, it was really the opposite in the opinion of many people.
seriously, that's why there are many complaints in the fandom of Nintendo, because all the time they are """CONTRADICTING"""
@masterLEON
You really are of people with an awareness of why "there is a charge" for the service, +1
@Dr_Corndog
Not upset, just expressing an opinion on a forum. Much like you did when you talked about how DK Tropical Freeze was a ripoff for $60. That game is probably about $20 more than it should have been. Nothing to get upset about though.
Let's give this video a chance before we throw it to the wolves.
Naaaaaaaaa, I didn't watch the video in the end. Got better stuff to do in my time than give NLIfe revenue.
(goes back to watching Pokemon: RD)
The problem with this article is comparing something that launched under 2000s standards to something launching in 2018
"oh, sony and xbox live launched crappy a decade ago"
That's like releasing a PS2 game in 2018 and calling it a modern triple A title to save dev costs.
I'm a nintendo fan but I'll never fanboy hard enough to defend releasing a weak service. When/if it improves over time, it will be considered. In current form though, seems quite useless. Cloud saves so I can bring my saves with me? Doesn't the switch already let me do that?
A crappy selection of NES roms? Pssht. I can bust out my old CFW PSP for that and have not only an unlimitted selection of nes games, but snes, PS1, all with superior emulation features, cheat code support, and custom rom support like the amazing assortment of link to the past rom hacks.
When people ask for a virtual console, they are talking more about having all their favorite classics on one system. Even with the PSP, i still always buy the GBA/NES zeldas for 3ds etc, and i don't have to pay a sub for them after the fact. I like the forward thinking of it too because 10 years from now I can still bust out that 3ds and i still own those zelda games. I'm not fond of the "pay to use, but stop paying and we take it away" design. Especially for a poor launch selection that lacks all the fantastic GBC/GBA zelda titles. and has no snes titles like super metroid or link to the past.
Lets promote it to change peoples mind lol
Yes, let's forget that there are already online systems that are better and give them a chance to get it right in 5-10 years. Or maybe the next time when they completely change their system again, new friendscodes and all
@Dom it's a shame you missed out a whole section about the awful voice chat app!
Another failing will be that any games already released without voice chat will not have it added.....eg arms, mario kart, resident evil co-op, doom.....
I really don't see the problem with it, it is only 20 bucks, and if you factor how much the twenty NES games would have cost seperately on the Wii U VC that amounts to 100 bucks so even just considering that aspect of the service it is an excellent deal. Throw in deals and discounts and it is a straight up bargain.
I think we should try to be positive. For the price of it is really inexpensive. We also do not know how most of what they announce are going to work, I think we just to calm down and see how it works before we rage out. Which I have seen a lot of people freaking out since the announcement.
The difference between PS Plus and Nintendo online is on my PS4 I can back my saves up to a thumb drive even if I don’t have a PS Plus subscription. Nintendo needs to allow saves to be moved to an SD card. Especially since the switch has less internal storage than most phones.
@Lord I'll be covering it in a separate article. It's a massive issue all in itself.
I may buy one month and see how it goes. I don’t play enough online games to see any value in this.
How about we just stop giving online paywalls a chance?
Hi, major Splatoon fanboy with hundreds of hours here and Rank X on everything blah de blah, and there's another angle I see people haven't considered in these comments; Namely, Nintendo Switch Online has decent odds of killing Splatoon.
Splatoon 2's netcode is GARBAGE. The game has a tickrate (how often the connection refreshes between players) of 16 hz, basically per second. Overwatch is at 60, Splatoon 1's is 25, and even MINECRAFT is higher at 20. And it's peer to peer connections! In 2018! It's pretty much unacceptable for a game this fast-paced and contributes to the constant one-hit kills from any weapon and latency nonsense like chargers shooting through walls, because the shot looked good on THEIR end.
People are loathe to pay for this kind of service so the community will bleed players no matter what, but charging money for this abysmal connectivity WILL drive people off. Unless Nintendo implements dedicated servers and ups the tick rate, when it comes to Splatoon 2 paid online absolutely is a rip-off and people will vote with their wallets right out the door.
I think the online service is pretty good overall. Cloud saves are nice and the new VC replacement is imo, a better approach at offering retro games. I just hope SNES games aren't too far behind and they should definitely add games from the Game Boy family too. The deals/discounts is a nice bonus as well.
It's a tough one really. I think this is another case of being aimed at the new Nintendo fans rather than long-timers who have bought two or sometimes three iterations of Virtual Console games.
So long as they expand the library to include SNES and perhaps N64 (even GameCube and Wii games?!) as part of the annual fee, this'll eventually satisfy both new and old customers alike.
My other tuppence worth is that they should have charged for online right from the start given the fact games like MK8, Splatoon 2 and ARMS are multiplayer focused. Then it wouldn't feel like such a sting.
I think for me I'm just fed up of getting the same NES games over and over. I bought them on the Wii, then 3DS and Wii U, I'm bored of the same games over and over.
I know that's just my opinion and many people wouldn't have played them but it's not very exciting.
Cloud saves and pricing is good though of course.
@cleveland124 Good to know.
I will defiantly subscribe to the yearly service but why are they starting it with the NES? also the cloud system will only save certain games. I think if that's true that is pretty pants. If the service is £20 a year then it will be worth having.
The nes mini sold out. This will do well. As other services are double the price or more!. Voice chat should have been handled better but apart from that i think its good value.
All I want is a way to backup game save's for FREE like on Ps4 or Xbox One to usb or micro sd, not really interested in having to pay Nintendo just to have a backup cloud saves. Don't really play that much online and the nes games I can play right now if I wanted to on Wii U plus many more other games. I don't care that Nintendo's Switch online is only $20 a year, just doesn't really having anything interesting going for it, so it isn't looking like I will be subscribing anytime soon.
Meh
The service is so cheap, I wish it was at least double like 40 pounds a year and we get closer to a service like the competition. Give us some indi and more not just nes games we all have or can play in our toasters
@cleveland124 that was my first cell phone. You make me feel old, thanks
And I agree to most of this. But I also believe that my pc offers the best online service and overall it’s free. I am not happy about paying for console online and all Nintendo is really doing is saving me from buying as ps+ anymore. It expired 5 months ago now. The only games I usually play on PS4 are single player and the couple multiplayer ones, I am fine with on switch/pc. Still not happy that Nintendo is jumping onto this “turning gaming into a service” like these other consoles have.
Do you guys think it would be worth it if I would only play the nes games? I havnt player most of them.
I can spare $20 a year. I play enough Splatoon and Smash to justify the cost.
Im just not excited to wait ages and ages for it to work it’s way up to GBA, GameCube etc. NES games aren’t really an incentive when I’ve bought them a million times. I get that it’s cheaper than others but I feel I’m essentially just paying for p2p matchmaking that I’m already using for free.
I don't support paid online multiplayer in general.
But the issue people have with Nintendo's Online Subscription Service is Nintendo has shown no effort to actually improve their notoriously terrible online in all the time since Nintendo Online Service was announced up until now.
Remember this? No mention of fixing it.
Nintendo refuses to allow you to move saves on and off the Switch locally, and their only other option is a paid subscription service. That screams anti-consumer.
@Zebetite yeah that my main issue. They haven’t said if they’re actually going to improve the online service so it just feels like I’m gonna be charged for something that is deservedly free because it isn’t good.
@Azathoth I always loved the price argument that people used to toss around where they would act like paying $5.99 for NES games and $7.99 for SNES game was highway robbery.
But here's the things, the Virtual Console was often the cheaper option for many games. If people don't believe me, let's look at how much some of these games cost at Gamestop. One thing to note is that Gamestop is currently running a retro game sale, so some of these games will be reduced in price. I'll put the normal prices by them as well.
NES
Super Mario Bros: $9.99(Note the multicarts with Duck Hunt are cheaper, but the only option on the VC is the standalone version)
Super Mario Bros 2: $12.99($19.99 is the normal price)
Super Mario Bros 3: $12.99
The Legend of Zelda: $19.99($29.99 is the normal price)
Zelda II: $11.99($19.99 is the normal price)
Metroid: $14.99
Kirby's Adventure: $19.99
Mega Man: $69.99
Mega Man 2: $24.99
Mega Man 3: $19.99
Mega Man 4: $ 34.99
Mega Man 5: $69.99
Mega Man 6: $49.99
Castlevania: $19.99
Castlevania II Simon's Quest: $9.99
Castlevania III: $29.99
Ghosts and Goblins: $14.99
Ninja Gaiden: $9.99
Ninja Gaiden II: $ 9.99
Ninja Gaiden III: $49.99
Now, keep in mind that these are some of the most popular titles the NES has to offer and these are often the games people think of when they bring up the system. Many of these games sold millions of copies when they first came out, and these are the prices on Gamestop.
But I know what some of you are going to say. Those games are worth $5.99, but there's no way the shorter arcade games are worth that. So, let's take look at some of the shorter arcade style games on the NES and see how much buying a cart would cost ya.
Donkey Kong: $24.99
Donkey Kong Jr.: $24.99
Donkey Kong 3: $19.99
Mario Bros: $24.99
Balloon Fight: $19.99
Wrecking Crew: $14.99
So, paying $5.99 for these games on the VC is highway robbery and Nintendo being greedy, but yet these games command sizable prices on the secondary market.
By the way, here's the cost of an NES on Gamestop
$89.99
Now, let's move onto the SNES.
Super Mario World: $12.99(The normal price is $19.99)
Super Mario Kart: $24.99(The normal price is $34.99)
Super Mario RPG: $54.99
The Legend of Zelda A Link to the Past: $21.99(The normal price is $29.99)
Super Metroid: $49.99
Kirby Super Star: $49.99
Kirby's Dream Course: $29.99
Kirby's Dream Land 3: $69.99
Earthbound: $199.99
Donkey Kong Country: $14.99($19.99)
Donkey Kong Country 2: $19.99
Donkey Kong Country 3: 29.99
Super Ghouls and Ghosts: $29.99
Super Castlevania IV: $39.99
Castlevania Dracula X: $149.99
Street Fighter II Turbo Hyper Fighting: $14.99
Mega Man X: $19.99(The normal price is $29.99)
Now, want a SNES to play these games on? Well, here's how much a used SNES will cost on Gamestop.
SNES System: $89.99.
So, what is my point to all this? Well, one of the most common complaints I heard for years regarding the Virtual Console was that the games were overpriced and that $5.99 and $7.99(with $9.99 for a couple of SNES games) were nothing but Nintendo being greedy.
I even hear it with the Switch when it comes to the arcade classics such as Punch-Out and Mario Bros. How $9.99 is Nintendo being greedy despite the cabinets being worth thousands of dollars, if you can even find them that is.
So, what are we now left with? Well, it appears the ability to simply buy older games and download them onto your system is now gone. So, we are left with you only having access to NES games if you sign up for the Nintendo network.
Now, $20 bucks a month and getting some games on top of that is a good deal. Until you consider the fact you don't own them. Suppose you can't afford your Nintendo Membership one month but want to play Super Mario Bros? Well, better hope you have it somewhere else.
What happens when the service shuts down? or the Switch Online Membership ends up being like Playstation Plus and Xbox Games for Gold, and games rotate in and out on a monthly basis?
Suppose they offer Earthbound or Super Mario World one month, but then pull it off? Well, if you missed that month you're screwed. If Nintendo never brings back those games, they you can't play them on your Switch, even if you have membership because you missed those games, and there is no way to buy those games on their own.
So, for everyone who banged and yelled loudly enough that Virtual Console games were too much and Nintendo was being greedy, pat yourselfs on the back. Because Nintendo has left behind the model of selling us games one by one(many of which are much cheaper then used copies are on the secondary market)
And have moved towards selling us games as part of a service or putting out microconsoles that will be hard to find.
One other thing is that when you miss a game on Playstation Plus or Xbox Games of Gold, you can still go out and buy the game. Not the best solution, but you aren't locked out of the game forever.
Unless Nintendo intends to bring these games out on their own, then you as the consumer will be locked out of certain games if Nintendo rotates them out of the lineup before you got a chance to get them.
But I suppose that is better then paying $5.99 for NES games and $7.99 for SNES games, huh?
OK, but how many times does Nintendo get to **** on its customers when it comes to online stuff and like before they are justified in kicking up a proper fuss?
It's not unacceptable sure. And yeah, it's new and developing. But it's also not fair to compare it to the early days of Xbox Live or PS plus. Because those services were doing something new. Nintendo is just joining the club.
And Nintendo's offering still appears to have some glearing flaws. Such as relying on an outside app for basic things like invites and chat. And that app being painfully low quality...
I will pay for it just for the ability to back up to the cloud. Transfer to a different Switch is better than the current encrypted system on 3DS. Need clarity on what software is not backed up, though.
Apart from that, there's nothing else for me in the current set up. Don't want online, don't want the app, don't want the NES games. That "might" change when offers are revealed. Discounts for Switch on MyNintendo for games I don't already have may make both services more attractive. Physical is still usually cheaper, though.
I'm subscribing anyway, but am fully aware that it's not good value for me since all I want is the save back up.
I get why it's the way it is. This is the cost of piracy/hacking/cheating. Not sure that the best way to tackle it is to make me pay for cloud saves. It wasn't me and it's being hacked without using saves anyway. Imposing restrictions and a paywall for online backup on legitimate consumers because others have compromised intellectual properties feels a touch unfair.
But, it what it is. Take it or leave it. I'll take it, but not without some disappointment.
I'd much rather be able to buy classic games outright, it's half the reason I got the switch as I've no interest in the new iterations of Zelda and Mario. Also they will likely raise their subscription price after a year, the low intro price is just to get people sucked in. I'm not arguing a subscription service, but people are too excited over the price and I thought it was obvious it would not stay at that price point.
No it objectively sucks burn Nintendo to the ground
XBL and PSN offers other benefits besides the ability to play online that make them worth paying for. Switch online is cheaper but the extra benefits are weak and to incentivise me to buy thta service, They do need to improve the extras.
It is 20 freaklng dollars people. Moan all you want because, in the end, it is what it is.
I hope that eventually they offer games from their more modern-ish lineup for free. Not necessarily Switch or Wii U games, but if I had the chance to play Mario Kart DS, Smash Bros Melee, or Wario Land Shake It! on Switch, I would jump at it. It makes sense to offer these kinds of games. And maybe some more obscure games from Nintendo's past, like that Ultra Hand game from Club Nintendo.
I have no complaints with the service and plan to invest in the family plan so my brother can have it too.
I don't get the complaints about losing access to the retro games once the service goes down for good. By the time that happens (which could pretty much be in a DECADE with how good Switch is doing), whatever new gaming console Nintendo would be cooking up will likely have a similar one ready to go.
This is basically jist paying for 20 rented NES games. Nintendo isn't adding ANYTHING more to the only service as it seems atm. No dedicated chat program, nothing in terms of evolving the online experience, no dedicated switch app that makes it possible to play with friends. This service is truly RIPPING PEOPLE OFF. As it is we are paying for NES games and for the ability to back up savegames. So nintendolife!!! Let's not try this before judging because it isn't adding anything of value. At Least not to me 😓
@Geeks4Life Right. The burden of proving that the online service will be worth anything has always rested on Nintendo. People have been telling us this "give them a chance" nonsense all along - "Just wait: Nintendo will give more details they will make it more worth it." they said. But look where we're at now. I feel like there's been pretty much little to no change in the details of the service since when they first revealed it back in early 2017, and what they revealed back then was nothing really it just felt like "BTW, you're all going to have to pay for our online services now. Lol." They have not mentioned any actual improvements to the online service at all. It's been this way ever since they announced it. At this point, it's clear they've never had anything to show and never will.
@Donutman
I'm glad somebody got the reference. I was thinking I should have gone with a more modern example. But I guess that probably just means we are both about the same age.
@Harmonie I'm actually glad that a lot of people can see how poorly Nintendo is handling their Online. Cheers bro.
I'd only be getting it for cloud saves, which is not worth it. Don't really have an interest in Nintendo's online games, the headphone problem, or SNES games with some tacked on online component.
Lack of VC support was the breaking point, and them offering select SNES games directly opposes the "oh, they're just moving on" argument. They simply hid it behind a monthly fee instead of the ability to carry those purchases over.
We don't really have a choice, most will end up paying as we want to play online.
@Dom Good!
What I want Nintendolife to do also is give us the best solution to voice chat.
Eg which USB wireless headset works?
Does a Y splitter cable work to blend switch audio and tablet chat?
Is there a Bluetooth audio jack?
Can a headset pick up two bluetooth audio feeds and blend?
Does using Bluetooth earbuds from my tablet under a wireless headset produce a quality cable-less result ? And so it goes on...
Ps. Any solutions please show Amazon buying guide.
It’s ridiculous that there’s no free or offline way to backup saves and the app is ridiculous and so are those who defend it. It really feels like they don’t care. And if they don’t care why should I?
I wonder if once it launches the feedback option in the menu will be removed as the feedback period will have ceased purpose!
They need alot to make me want to get it... No nes games, nobody cares about those or SNES really, it should only be N64, GameCube and Wii games remastered then we talk ... Cloud saves for EVERY game not just a select few, sort the eshop out and have way more deals and games with 50% off at least like other platforms... And online play (not really an online gamer) needs to be flawless... Sooo yeah
@Geeks4Life lots of us see how poor this is. £20 for nothing do i pay steam to play games online do i hell. do i pay gog do i hell. But the fanboys will come out and defend anything. Nintendo are a buisness a very rich buisness. Them and 99.999999999999% of companys in gaming dont give a toss about you just your wallet.
That too MrMac. This is what they needed a 1 year delay for?
Simply not going to pay 20$ (or what it'll be in my country) a year for 5 or 6 years to be able to backup my saves (not interested in online or the NES games - have those on my 3DS).
And besides what will you do when the cloud save service shuts down in maybe 10 years, and your save files maybe becomes corrupted (there - hopefully - will be games that you still want to play 20 years from now without starting a new save file).
This is one of the things that keeps me on the fence with the Switch (one of the other is that I would prefer a Switch Mini handheld version only, but that, I admit, is my own problem).
A good number of complaints about the service run into fan-minded fallacies. P2P or not, the online experience remains part of the officially advertised platform experience and warrants the amount of responsibility and monitoring that you won't hire many people to do for free. Classic games are a perk that features classics with decent amounts of genre-definer gameplay among them, they're promised with functionality you won't get on VC (early Pokemon re-releases can't even trade online despite emulating the GB link cable through direct connections) and putting them on the scales opposite the "any smartphone can play them" argument is bullcrap - no company should HAVE to build their distribution strategies in competition with piracy (on a more pragmatic extra footnote, a great many NES classics are platformers - have you so much as TRIED those on nothing but a touchscreen? Android gamepads with phone holders cost a pretty penny, too). As for cloud saves... there's no question about them being free - Nintendo is giving out server space, and it's strictly up to a company if they want to give some space away for free like Microsoft and Valve reportedly do or not. But something tells me external storage backups would have definitely been free... the question is, does Nintendo want them at all? They remain pretty concerned about outplaying hackers and pirates, and the recently touted flaw doesn't mean much (you don't throw the towel on software and storage security measures just because your supplier effed up the SoC in a bunch of units - by the way, the hackers apparently have no idea how many Switches are estimatedly vulnerable). Maybe it'll change in the future when Switch nears its twilight years and becomes lower priority, but after four hacked consoles (and at least a couple more that dealt with an influx of physical bootlegs), it would be hard to blame Ninty for simply having this up to here right now. Several years of sailing DS, PSP and many emulated libraries under the black flag in my own track record, I'm certainly in no position to complain. :V
Overall, the service is bound to evolve and change like everything does indeed. But until then, it's civil to either buy the subscription or not. If it's a make or break about your whole Switch experience, consider whether you want to keep the console - it's new enough that selling a used unit should still cover a good part of, say, PS4 Slim. But internet dramas are going to impact as much as lootbox controversies did (although some naively believe that some PR backpedaling and a few typically uninformed half-assed law drafts are impact enough, and they'll believe it until the next Pink Vader in the industry), and they are never about promoting customer respect as much as they're about promoting fanbase worship. Thanks but no thanks in that regard, fans are disgusting by definition as it is. So tread down your inner fans and try voting with your wallets as customers given a commercial offer on the usual take-it-or-leave-it basis.
And if the whole tragedy and atrocity of Nintendo's isn't enough to set you free from the clutches of Splatoon and MK8D (and other stuff like MHGU coming right into the doorway of the service's debut), then it's a moot point to discuss until you can really call it quits. "Other consoles have nailed it years ago" has long proven to be less than a compelling argument for the company that stopped viewing itself in a direct competition with other console makers long ago. From their perspective, Wii U still struggled mostly for failing to get its main points across - and it's hard to argue that Switch has long scored a lot more therein. The rest is a bonus.
But if/when this approach changes enough to alter the service drastically beyond "baby steps"(c), chances are we'll notice. Even though the amount of fan buzz about it sours my own appreciation of such alterations regardless of my own preferences - sort of like it was with Snake Pass and the whole perversity of the icon debacle (yeah, I still can't bring myself to update despite liking the ultimate design much more).
@nhSnork I don’t have time for baby steps. Have to be honest I’ve been kinda regretting getting a switch. It’s library just isn’t that appealing to me besides first party.
I don't know. I'm finding it hard to care at the price point and just hope that it will adjust and get better over time. I understand that not everyone has that ability to pay.
There is the potential for continued improvement when the online service income becomes an important part of the bottom line.
@WebHead now that's a fair point, a negative and yet legitimately civil comment. Aforesaid stuff happens and never feels nice, but you have the freedom to choose what to do - keep your Switch for the first-party titles or sell it and reinvest the money. Perhaps for a few years until you can reassess the Switch library again and make another decision. Few choices are one-way doors in this field anyway.
Just because the competitors do it, doesn't mean it isn't anti-consumer. Nintendo recoup the money for servers through game sales (first, second and third party).
I think people take the term "Soapbox" far too literally. Besides the usual trolls and suspects who don't ever have anything positive to say, people seem to either be disappointed or content about the details released so far. Who knows maybe Nintendo will release more details and/or features over the coming months. September is 4 months away and alot can evolve between now and then. If online is not for you that's fine, but I'd rather wait until I can try the actual service before breaking out the virtual torches and pitchforks.
Nintendo really needs to make an MMO that has mass appeal and will make people want to pay for a subscription.
MMOs like Roblox are absolutely raking in the cash on PC/tablets from the young gamer market. This is the same young people that Nintendo targets. Right now, Nintendo is really missing the boat by not having something similar.
We're not seriously trying to compare what Sony and MS offered a decade ago to what Nintendo is doing now, are we? That's an awfully dirty and busted soapbox you're standing on. They can't even give us decent local save backup options (something other consoles have had for years) or throw voice chat on the system, but they're going to charge for cloud saves, and their less than stellar online MP system? Yikes.
For the price, it is a perfectly nice offering but, you know? Haters gonna hate and whiners gonna whine.
What are people expecting? To pay $20 and get NES, SuperNES, N64, GameCube and Wii games from the start? And then just give us new Switch games for free too.
The ONLY complaint that is deserved is the lack of back up saves locally to a microSD card and the weird way of doing voice chat (though I couldn’t care less about that since I’ve never used chat on multiplayer games and I will never ever use it), everything else is just whining.
@rjejr were you afraid you'd summon the dark lord if you spelled Nintendo correctly? 😂
i also am dubious about this service, sure its cheaper than the other consoles but its not exactly the same type of system, it has a very small footprint for online games and i cant see that changing.
along with the NES games which i have no interest in what so ever, ill be giving this service a pass and see how i get on without it, ill happily uninstall splatoon 2 which is the only online game i have on the system.
It's definitely not for me. They had a big chance with the virtual console and a proper voice system instead of that godawful app, and they just throw the console completely under the bus.. What a shame, Nintendo.. You blew it.
I look forward to the expanding library of games and the "special offers". I generally avoid online play and am not living in perpetual fear of my games not being cloud saved.
If people are mad now wait until the tiered subscription is announced:
NES, GameBoy sub $20
NES, GameBoy, SNES, GBA sub $30
NES, GameBoy, SNES, GBA, N64, DS sub $40
And you can double those prices if you’re in Australia 🇦🇺
I just want to buy specific games. For example Donkey Kong Country 2 isn't on the SNES Mini. I don't like this top down approach from Nintendo and am considering selling my Switch while it still has value. I'll keep an eye on the service.
Nintendo trying to get their hands in our pockets again. There should be a way to store games on an external drive, period. And as for games, it's always the same old rehash with nothing you really want. The fanboys will scream,"Wait till next year, there'll be better games", but that old reply played out decades ago.
No Nintendo, NO!
I don't mind paying for online and their pricing is more than reasonable. And, if the online-enabled games are promoted as a "bonus" incentive, that's fine.
However, claiming that a trickle feed of classic games is a replacement for a full-featured Virtual Console marketplace is what is making so many people angry. Are the downloads permanently tied to an active subscription or are they yours to "keep" on an offline system? What happens when the service eventually is taken down in the future? Nintendo needs to explicitly address this.
If consumers are to fully embrace downloads as a viable replacement for physical media, there needs to be a lot more longterm transparency on Nintendo's part. Tethering the issue to the online package will only make the issue worse.
Nah... pricing is all it’s got going for it. It is 2018, maybe let’s not.
Not completely on board.
1. Why should I pay $20 to play the other 50% of my Splatoon 2 and MK8 (I have to stick with Story-Mode)?
2. I couldn't care less about the NES games or the cloud saves.
3. No on-console chat is being offered.
4. No themes have been offered either.
If my last two reasons were offered or even talked about, I'd gladly pay the $20 a year. But as it is now, I'll be buying games that don't rely on online-play.
It’s okay to be critical of Nintendo’s Online service, I mean there’s quite a few thing they could have should have done to make it better, but I’m sure it will get better over time. Besides, most of “will you sub to Switch online” polls I’ve seen have come back with a 80%+ saying yes. As long as they got the online games to play, it’ll be worth it. And we already got Splatoon, Mario Kart, Arms, Mine Craft and Rocket League as some of the bigger online games, not to mention Pokémon, Smash Bros, Monster Hunter and perhaps Metroid Prime coming up too.
I ain’t missing out them, especially for such a cheap online service.
@locky-mavo
And Animal Crossing hopefully.
Between Smash, Pokemon and Animal Crossing I think it'll be more like 95% take up.
Not sure why the world exploded at the news of the demise of the VC. Everyone hated the VC. At least the idea of having to rebuy all the classic games over and over again with each new console. If this new method becomes the Netflix of retro games, even if they trickle them out slowly as always, then VC can go die a horrible death and never come back.
Given the choice between paying $20 or $50 and getting either a couple of NES games to play or some current/last gen games I'd probably go for the $20 option. I have lots of games on the XBO from the Gold service but I could count the number I actually bother playing on one hand. Even less so on PS+ as we don't even bother downloading them (as PS4 storage sucked). All those services do is stop me buying Indies (as they'll probably be 'free' In a couple of months).
Discounts are an advantage of a subscription (although I've been stung on Xbox buying games that were then given away 'free' the next week). Nintendo mentioned discounts but didn't go into any detail, but if the Nintendo Online service gave a discount on buying any game or even just increased sale percentages (like XBO) then that would make it worth it alone.
As for no VC, well it sucks. Makes the Wii U worth owning though.
@Alikan "if you spelled Nintendo correctly?"
After 10 years on this site if I typed Ntinedo correctly my account would be reported as hacked.
@invictus4000 Yes, the VC should have been cross buy. Can you imagine having to buy PS1 Classics 3 times for the PS3, PSP and Vita?
It's Nintendo who didn't want to do Cross Buy and killed the VC.
I'm not complaining. A better online experience was destined to require a subscription sooner or later, and it happened in the Switch generation. Honestly, what's offered is fair from an initial standpoint. Once I've actually experienced it, I'll revisit it and actually post complaints if there are any. Like it or not is the price of progress, and we're going to have to stomach it or at least we have the choice to not.
Only four words to express my feelings: DIDDY KONG RACING ONLINE <3333
You mean you expect a bunch of paunchy neckbeards to give something a chance? HOW DARE YOU!
Worst online service ever!!!! I mean seriously how can you only charge 4 dollars a month that’s what I get paid in an entire year!!!
Finally skmeone points out what good value £20 a YEAR gets you. Let's not forget we all knew this was coming as well. If the sub let's Nintendo add some extra features to the NSO like messaging then I'm all for it.
And does anyone really miss the VC? Aren't Nintendo used to being vilified for bringing out the same old games over and over again? Sure, I'd love some GameCube and Wii games to make the cut, but I'd rather those games were re-done to run natively. An upscaled Xenoblade Chronicles or Super Mario Sunshine? Yes please.
@invictus4000
This I agree with. Nintendo ruined the VC years ago, it was only a matter of time before it was put out to pasture.
I'm really not sure defending this based on a comparison with what Nintendos competitors were doing 10 years ago is a great idea. It simply illustrates how far they let themselves fall behind in the last 15 years.
NES games again! you are clearly clueless Mr Nintendo
microsoft had no real examples of how to exploit the online services. they where the first. they improved the service with help from the community, a community nintendo treats like 9 year old kids.
nintendo could at least give the audiance twitch, youtube and achievements.
so people can express themself somehow.
the nintendo network is now behind walls of controll and dictatorial influence of nintendo. thats why i dont like it.
futhermore the online services are ok. i can life with paying for online gaming due to maintance etc.
and you can play classics( i dont care about, but others do so whi am i to judge)
Here's what I think. My only complaint about the online service is having to use the app for chat. It is terrible and an inconvenience and awkward.
Virtual console:
Nintendo themselves, I think, confirmed that virtual console will not return, at least under the banner "virtual console" which to me means they plan to release more classic games with their online service. If you look on their website and read the outline for the service, it says "will launch with 20 NES Classic games, with more to come" something along those words. Meaning we're getting more games, could just be more nes, maybe on year 2 they'll do SNES, who knows.
They(Nintendo) also said that more details about their online service will come later before launch, meaning we still don't know everything. For $20 a year, there isn't much to complain about. It's a third the cost of Xbox and ps4. Also, they're adding online features the those classic games, online multiplayer and the "pass the controller" thing are awesome.
I think most people are nitpicking due to what has been announced not being what we wanted, which I understand. Hopefully when all details are revealed things will be clearer about what Nintendo plans are for online
i think nintendo made a mistake when designing the nintendo switch.
the switch just cant handle an extra bluetooth channel for bleutooth devices, it will conflict the joycons etc therefore you have to use the app.
also the same reason with twitch, it seems that the switch isnt capable of streaming and gaming at the same time.
and thats what i always complain about with nintendo, they just dont calculate things before they design things. always make halfbaked product. this is going on for almost 25 years.
It’s cheap enough for me not to stress about and will definitely be subscribing to it.
Nintendo is only good for their first party. Expecting more, like too many do / did here and you'll be dissapointed.
Can't wait to pay €4.40 a year for online and cloud backup. What a bargain.
The cloud-system is already flawed, since not all games will be supported! Of course people who want to play online (and don't mind paying for it) should give it a chance. And we don't know the full specifics yet. But personally I think that if they ask money for it they should deliver online that is better then what they did before. So not on par with Wii u online, but better. Knowing Nintendo I am very sceptical, just like a lot of people.
It won't bother me though, since I am not a online-player. And I definitely don't want to pay for it. Also, I am not interested in Cloud-storage.
@Dethmunk you do it on purpose to pretend you are not understanding? People want to manually copy their saves for free, not to use Nintendo servers for free. People who are complaining are the ones who don't want this online service, not people who want it but for free.
It could have be 40 Bucks and nothing more.
There's more info to come, I'll get it regardless as it's something that will grow over time. Not bothered about voice chat in the slightest and I'm definitely not interested in achievements or trophies. Messaging and invites would be nice though.I'm sure they'll release a video detailing everything down the line.
Just sort out the voice chat and matchmaking, Nintendo. It's shocking how difficult it is to set up a match of Splatoon 2 with my friends when we're online. How hard would it be to implement an invite system? Rocket League does it seamlessly.
@LuckyLand,
True,but there does seem to be a lot of people who think they are somehow entitled to free online services forever.
The cloud saves included in a already pretty good value package,which at this price pretty much all Switch owners will be signing up for,is a minor issue imo.
"We'd much rather pay a small subscription fee and enjoy a more robust service that will no doubt grow over the years to come, than stay with the limited free version we have now."
Very well said. Sadly, though, I'm guessing that about half the people who write comments will skip the entire article and get to complaining. Personally, I don't understand cloud saves because I've never managed to somehow lose a saved game. I don't care about voice chat because I really don't what other people have to say while I'm playing a game. And the NES games... since I never bought any of them in any other format, I'd be happy to at least try them out. Really, I don't have a lot of use for the online service, but it's really not THAT much money, so I'll do it anyway because (1) I still want to play ARMS (and possible other future online games) online occasionally, and (2) I like Nintendo and will support them because I know that the more support they receive, the better they keep getting.
@kurtasbestos,
Ah but you underestimate the vocal minority who post on internet forums,they will complain no matter how good or bad the service is.
While the masses have other things to worry about,rather than Nintendo charging a tiny amount of money for cloud saves.
Well of course! (as an answer to the title) That's what any logical, balanced life form would do.
But this is the internet.
@River3636 You must work for that company, considering that if people don't moan, it will never improve either. If anything, staying silent will have them make it worse, because they'll test the line to see what they can get away with.
I'll buy it when I inevitably have to to play Monster Hunter/MK8D online, but other than that? I'd not pay for this.
Offer something more than just NES games and we'll talk.
@Dethmunk
You're already paying for the hardware and the games, and they aren't paying for servers because its all P2P. This is a profit stream for Nintendo. If people are happy paying for it then great, but don't be under any illusions about what it is and don't ever swallow extra charges unthinkingly.
Wittering on about 'respect' is just hilarious. Nintendo are a profit driven company, that's all they exist to do. Don't anthropomorphise them into some kind old grandad who fought in the war.
@PALversusNTSC
They didn't make a mistake. Switch does exactly what they wanted it to do. They just decided, rightly or wrongly, that voice chat isn't that important to them and having another layer of technology (a phone or Discord) means someone else to blame when angry parents come calling. Likewise with Twitch, it isn't deemed that important on a device that's portable and where any cost can be offloaded onto the consumer who needs a capture card. Switch is the best hardware they've ever designed in terms of doing what they want. If it isn't what you want that's unfortunate but don't kid yourself it's an oversight.
@SakuraHaruka
there is a difference between systems what i want personally.
they have been rereleasing nes games forever.
on the virtual console side, sure i want some classics, but in this day and age, i rather have nintendo remake certain games rather than rereleasing them.
virtual console would be great, but as seen by other companies its sure to be death, except for first party games.
companies will either rerelease them now or remake them themselves, which i am completely fine with
No voice chat solution, no party’s, no games that interest me. I’ll subscribe to play online but I really can’t see anything good about this at this time. Not sure how the author can suggest that the features offered are close to those offered by Nintendo’s competitors. Also, the idea that because Sony and Microsoft’s online offerings have developed over time these past few years we should wait patiently - who knows how many years - for Nintendo to realise it’s 2018 is absurd.
Edit: I don’t mean to moan, I know it’s cheap so it’s not a huge issue. The announcement just didn’t fulfill any of my hopes, I guess.
@kurtasbestos It's more that people don't believe that Nintendo will actually improve the quality of the online which is a totally reasonable stance to take. They believe Smash Switch will be as laggy as previous Smash games for example.
OOF’
Does being cheaper than the competition really matter when it offers an inferior service and unlocks an inferior online experience? While $20 may not be much money, I'd much rather use that $20 on something actually good, like maybe a good downloadable game.
Homo Nintendini lupus est.
@Dethmunk don't be sorry. There's a lot of Nintendo "fans" on this site that seem to hate everything about their company trying to provide for them at a price 1/3 the competition.
I don't get all the whiners that think paying for a service that costs Nintendo $ to maintain is somehow screwing them over when all they're trying to do is offset the cost in the cheapest possible way.
Nintendo, the company that has provided a steady stream of joy for me since I got an NES in 1990 at 3 years old wants 20 bucks for an ever expanding library of games, special offers, cloud, and online play. They're more than welcome to it and I'm sure most users will get over themselves and pony up. Just need to put up with the whiners for a few more months.
How about we stop making excuses for horrible moves by Nintendo? The online service years late and way worse than that of the competition.
I own almost every Nintendo console, including a Virtual Boy, but this is just horrible. It's not about the money(it's cheap), it's that they ask money for a crappy service with barely any online multiplayer games available.
Where are all the first person shooters like CoD/Battlefield/Destiny? Overwatch? Fortnite? Competitive sports games with a big community behind it? GTA? Competitive fighting games like Street Fighter V/Dragonball Fighterz/Tekken/Soul Calibur? Racing games?
On Switch you pay for Splatoon, Smash Bros and maybe some Mario Kart. And you get no voice chat/leaderboards or anything. It's basically just basic matchmaking.
The fact that nobody minds paying three times as much for PS+ but do for the Nintendo service just shows how bad it really is.
Praise, gripe, make excuses for or against.... In the end none of that matters. What does is what is being offered, and would you use it at all. Personally I won't be getting it. Sure it is cheap, but I simply do not play games online on any console system. The NES games do not interest me either because I can play them already on either the NES Mini, on the Retron 5 from the original carts that I still own, or on the Wii/WiiU VC (daughter still plays those systems so they remain setup).
Until such a time comes that the service offers something that actually makes itself worth while to me, it would just be a waste to bother with it. It is the same way with the PSN and XBLive. Sure those offer more current games for their "rental service", but I have found that more often than not, they are not games that I have any interest in. But if they do, they are often on sale anyways, or are old enough where I can find in the bargain bin at the store cheaper than what it is digitally.
The saddest part about Switch online (and every Nintendo attempt at online each console generation) is that it will be completely scrapped and overhauled on the next console generation for something entirely different.
Nintendo should've hired that Mario 64 Online hacker. Now that would be something worth paying paying for. Dr Mario online? Not so much.
@MFD again, it is what it is. I have nothing to really say except suck it up. I am sure voicing your opinion really helps. This is Nintendo we are talking about.
It doesn't really make sense to compare Switch Online to the launch state of Xbox Live and Playstation Plus. Xbox Live pioneered this type of service and launched 15 years ago. Playstation Plus launched 8 years ago and raised the bar by offering free (and recent) games.
NSO should at least be comparable to current state of these services. Instead, it's basically a cheaper version of launch PS Plus, except with a worse online experience, an abysmal app, and free games from 30+ years ago rather than 24 months ago.
One thing that doesn’t sit right with me is how these classic titles are tied to the online service. What happens when the Switch has run its course and the servers are shut down? The games go away, right? Those who own a Wii/Wii U still have access to their library of retro titles, and nothing changes that.
Also, remember when Irem pulled the license for the R-Type series on the Wii? Those who had already purchased the game were in the clear. Now, with the games being tied to a subscription, customers are essentially at the mercy of these developers and the deals that they’ve negotiated. If they pull a game from the Switch service, you’re completely out of luck.
I think that, game-wise, there is mounds of potential, but there are things about all of this that seem like a huge step backwards.
@BanjoPickles On the other hand, you didn't pay for those games anyway...
@BanjoPickles offering their "rental" games and buying digitally are two different things. If you paid money to buy a game, then it is yours even after the service gets shut down. If you get the rental game because you are subscribed to their online service, then of course you would lose it when the service goes down or when you stop your subscription. It is the same with the XBLive and PSN. Even with the Switch, if you bought a game, it stays with you even if the licenses are pulled, that just means it wont be for sale anymore. Rental games (aka "free" games from a paid service) are not yours to keep, and are subject to be lost at any time depending on circumstances.
I will not give it a chance.
@SilentS
I know. That’s what I was getting at. By not offering the option of purchasing said games, they disappear when the provider of the service says they disappear. The service would be a stellar idea if they also allowed customers to purchase the titles.
I dont care about NES games, the only thing that seems worth paying for is the cloud saves, but even then Nintendo is the only one locking the the feature behind a paywall without alternatives.
Man, the amount of salt this subject has produced...
I'll be getting a subscription day one. I don't care what any of you think. lol
@Grumblevolcano People are going to have to face the fact that any "twitch" game like Smash Bros. is at the mercy of Internet latency. It has to be practically instantaneous. No amount of online service quality is going to change that at all.
A fair bit of non-sense being spouted in the comments. First, a service is not immune to critique simply because it is cheap. Of course, it would be subject to even more scrutiny if it were more expensive, but to everyone saying "It's only $20, stop complaining" that's a load of rubbish.
Second, these online platforms do not magically get better because of a subscription fee. Online services have gotten better due to technological advancements across the industry - the subscription fee is almost completely irrelevant. Services such as AWS, Azure, etc... make it easier than ever to expand online infrastructure on demand. A sub fee is not a necessity - it's a business choice. Otherwise, how has PC's online infrastructure improved without a subscription fee?
As I mentioned above, a subscription fee is absolutely not necessary. There are plenty of robust "free" online services - Steam, Battle.net, Origin, GoG Galaxy, etc... It's nothing more than a business strategy. Even standalone games outside of the aforementioned platforms have had robust online. Online infrastructure is part of the budget for those titles, and is factored into the pricing of the games itself. Just because you aren't paying a subscription fee, doesn't mean resources weren't going towards online infrastructure.
Finally, on topic - of course all online systems have to start somewhere, but it's absurd to think that Nintendo has to start where Microsoft did in the early 2000's. It's not the early 2000's anymore. They shouldn't get a pass simply because the service is new. In no other industry would you give a new product a pass. It's on the newcomer to offer a product or service that is competitive with the rest of the market. Nintendo did have a good start - free online multiplayer, which is why it stings getting charged for it. The NES games are a nice bonus, I simply don't believe Nintendo has done a very good job thus far of showing why their service should cost a penny. I will absolutely buy it - and I'm sure many others will - solely so I can play Mario Kart, Splatoon, and Smash Bros. online - but that's doesn't mean it's an amazing service.
EDIT: I should point out, I'm not overly salty about it. Just not thoroughly impressed. My comment it more directed towards those launching attacks on others that say something negative about it. I'm the biggest Nintendo fanboy there is, but it's annoying when people try to shutdown any sort of critique.
As long as the cloud paywall stays, I won't buy it. Nintendo is the first company I've heard of that has done that.
gamers are rebelious, gamers have an oppinion, they always had/have.
that's what made gaming what it is today.
it evolved, got better, companies listened to great new ideas from young people. at this point its almost bigger then holywood.
it was the reason why the second player(sony) overtook the first player(nintendo) and the thirth player(microsoft) got the change to join the industry.
but all these todays nintendo ceo's are a disgrace for all the hard work miyauchi(rip) had done. he gave us the nes, and the super advanced super nintendo, because he wanted the most powerfull console on the market.
no we have to life with dictatorial old people at nintendo who blocks young employees ideas, and who are afraid of the time.
man, i just want my childhood nintendo back.
Let's not forget that all these companies are competitors and they definitely are competing against another in every way shape or form regardless what Nintendo tries to portray.
Nintendo seems to only toot their own horn when it's rather convenient overall. Also, i believe not comparing Nintendo to last gens or current is a slap in the face to them as a company in whole, especially if they aren't improving or learning from past mistakes.
Remember the complaints on how Nintendo was always being left out in basically every aspect ? I feel similar here, you can't exclude Nintendo from this race either. They have to be held accountable for every decision good or bad moving forward. Only time will tell if this is worth it or fixes anything with their online business practices.
For now it seems to be a baby step to in the right direction. The paywall save clouds is getting a lot of negative feedback so hopefully they are paying attention to this matter.
Overall from what i heard and know so far i think 20 bones is a steal for a yearly online service compared to the comp and what it comes with seems decent enough but what i'm more curious about is the actual deal side of things. Nintendo has always been pretty stingy with putting their own games on sale no matter how old haha.
the problem is that nintendo does not realy inovate.
they just reinvent a new toothbrush.
they do the same trick over and over again. they would realy took a step ahead if they just Listen to their costumers. the switch is a great concept, but give it its todays features.
just a case of willing to be open for ideas, holding themselfs a mirror in front of them.
yes we can be the inovating company, but there has to be basics to be succesfull in the end, to keep people happy with their nintendo switch for at least 5/6 years.
from my oppinion this thing is doomed, if things dont change with online gaming within 12 months.
Please understand...
im neither a friend or foe of nintendo company(its people)
i just love the brandname nintendo(its people are just passengers in the long history of its great name)
i just want them to be back on top, thats why i always buy their consoles in hope that at some point things changed at their headquarters.
they make absolutely top notch games, glitchfree day one. their product are highly duarable always have been. but after the super famicom some controll freaks starting to work at nintendo, and their arrogance wiped away all the nintendo magic away.
@roadrunner343 on the point. i agree.
The price tag is the only thing that saves it for me, I want cloud saves and hopefully they start adding other titles from N64 and even GCN in the near future. I won't hold my breath as they will want to monetize those roms moreso than they do the NES ones.
Gimme SNES
@GymePoggle
"worse online experience"?, you played in the NSO now? I say, because it makes me curious that when Nintendo launches (or launched as I see in their/your comments) the NSO, this continues to have the same problems of the game online ("the p2p connection?"), Really?, which is why we will pay 20 dollars, for a, at least, a decent online service game (no failure connections, less Lag) seriously, they/you saw or were in the future?
"Let's Give Nintendo Switch Online A Chance Before We Throw It To The Wolves"
I don't think that's how the Internet works.
@Captain_Gonru "I'm also curious just how much online play will be cut off"
I was actually thinking more about Hulu and Netflix. Was going to comment but gatorboi seemed to have that argument covered, 50 - 1, but I think he enjoys those odds.
I've had a head cold for 4 days that turned into a chest cold today, so you'll have to excuse me now.
@SakuraHaruka You don't seem to have understood me, or you really think I'm from the future. Nintendo's current online service is clearly worse than both Xbox Live and PS Plus, not just now, but even back when PS Plus launched. Nintendo's track record with online gaming has been extremely poor and slow developing. It would be surprising if the launch of NSO resulted in Nintendo's online service drastically improving.
I am still not sold on the service as online gaming is not my thing (have not played online mk8d for a year, have not launched Splatoon since like September and even arms that I really enjoy for a few months) and I don't care about NES games either... Maybe I will put the money anyway but I will basically paying for a backup of save files (after loosing 25h+ of south park I can understand the feeling...)
@james_squared nope, the majority of Switch owners will buy it regardless and the debate in here will go by completely unnoticed.
those 8-bit NES games are pitiful....give us 16-bit SNES classics instead! or better, give us Virtual Console (((((((((
Always best to wait and see with these sorts of things but if Nintendo doesn't address the negativity around their online offering it will effect their bottom line.
Lets not joke about this, Nintendo cant afford to have anything mess their bottom line up
@IronMan28
My plan too. I doupt that Nintendo's online games become any more stable, they'll just start charging for them.
lol @ that damage control
@WiltonRoots Yup. I'll buy it as my daughter enjoys playing Splatoon 2 online. So, it's not like I have a choice in the matter.
Hahahahahehehaha, good one... Oh wait, you were being serious.
A shit sandwich doesn't magically become caviar because its $20 compared to the Phily cheese steak's $60. It's still a shit sandwich.
And you conveniently avoid mentioning all save backup on the point about cloud saves, which is what most people having problem with it are referring to, that other companies don't keep the safety of your saved games hostage behind a paywall.
The embarrassing and shameful online app - not mentioned.
It's new, so it should be excused for being bad - sorry, that's just insane. It's not 2002, it's 2018. Anything new on the market is going to be compared to its peers. Anything else would make no sense. If a company nowadays launched a dumb phone with tech from 2002 and one third of the price of the top of the line 2018 smartphone, they'd be laughed off the market. I won't buy a CPU with the performance of a Pentium 3 1ghz for one third of the price of a top i7.
Cya
Raziel-chan
@Luffymcduck well, that I'm not sure about. It probably will be more stable. If it's noticeable, that's a different question. Xbox Live goes out for me more than you'd think (once every few months or so) and my internet service is generally good. Frankly, I think the free retro games (not going to assume either way on consoles) should be worth the asking price of $4 and some change per year when splitting the cost with other people.
@GymePoggle
Yes, ""Currently"", the Nintendo online is very poor (I play Mario Kart online and, yes, fail connections are very common, oh well...), but do you think that will be the case when the pay service is launched?.
Be optimistic; well, for me, yes, and believe me, I have received disappointments (and cruel), but no way that I am in a negative plan for another "disappointment", without knowing if it is true or not.
Switch is a Failure?, No right, and many thought the worst, especially for the Wii U and "the bad" decisions of Nintendo, and look now, is a success!
That's why my constant complaint of exaggerated negativity here, because instead of waiting for information or results and so then really complain or encourage; It seems they come from the future saying it is a failure or a disaster.
Nintendo always said that the service will come and will cost cash. The pricing is ok, so no complaints about that.
In my eyes the argument of having a stable network infrastructure lacks a bit. Players can potentially profit from the infrastructure in future games. For the existing ones (for example Splatoon and Mario Kart) Nintendo would have to completely reprogram the network code of the games, changing it from peer to peer to something that uses the new infrastructure. Hear my words: This will not happen.
But the point stands: Future games can potentially profit.
I'm not a big online player. Multiplayer happens in my living room together with friends. Not only because of the crappy online app you need to have voice chat. (In fact all of my friends use Teamspeak instead.) But Nintendo don't stomp this app into the ground and offer voice chat via the console itself, they try to push the App in the future. Not a big deal for me - as I said I'm not playing online that much. But this leads to the point that really makes me angry:
Now I understand why Nintendo don't let us backup our save data by ourselves.
I sunk 750 hours of playing time in Xenoblade. Every time I switch on my console I pray it's not wrecked. Maybe the day will come and it is. And then? So as long as we can't backup the saves by ourselves we're practically forced to pay extra and pay for a service, some people just would not need otherwise. I'm really a Nintendo fanboy but I argue that this was Nintendos plan from the day on they decided to not let us save our data on a SD card.
This - and this point only - really makes me angry about the hole online service thing. They not only lock cloud saves behind a paywall (which would be ok for me tbo - I know others think different), they lock save backups behind it.
Bad move Nintendo!
(Sorry about my English - I'm no native speaker.)
What BS. PSN was entirely free for online play until the PS4 and offered a much more modern and robust system on PS3 than this tired excuse of a service on Switch. Nintendo doesn't get to pretend as if its 2005 and everything in this sector is new and uncharted
"Every online service has to start somewhere" - my biggest gripe is that, by the time the online service launches, we're talking 18 months after the console launched... Good luck managing people's expectations with that timeline...!
Show Comments
Leave A Comment
Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...