Pokémon Let's Go Pikachu And Eevee Need A Switch Online Sub For Core Gameplay Features

And so it begins.

Was this ever in doubt?

Does this also mean we don't have to pay for Pokémon Bank separately anymore?

I would hope everyone was expecting this. No surprise here.

This title is misleading.

Shame, there’s no reason to get rid of these features.

Was wondering how it’d be implemented. I hope Pokemon switch 2019 has the other online features back.

I thought they already went on record saying the game would not use the paid online service, and that's what created the confusion about it not having online at all. Whatever, then.

Well...
Let's see what will happen...

I...dont see the logic of removing the GTS...that was a way to trade Pokemon without needing to actually know someone with the game

Isn’t this a flat contradiction of something they said last week about having no plans to use the Switch Online subscription? I’m sure I read that in more than 1 place...

@DandaraLHH No, Pokémon Bank is its own thing entirely.

Plus, Let's Go! won't even have Bank compatibility, since it only has the 151+1 OG Pokémon

The buneary hole goes deeper yet.

This is possibly the most misleading and click-baity title you've come up with.... Online battling and trading are not core gameplay features. Based on your title I assumed one wouldn't be able to complete the main story-line or catch pokemons without the subscription, which obviously is not the case here. Fix it?

It's safe to assume that Super Smash Bros, Mario Kart and Splatoon all will require online subscription to access online features, so why not Pokemon GO as well?

Well at least you’re smarter than Ryan. Even when presented with this info, he still held onto the belief that it wouldn’t have online functionality.

https://www.nintendolife.com/news/2018/06/pokemon_lets_go_pikachu_and_eevee_creators_share_all_the_details_you_need_in_new_q_and_a

I wish them an ounce of luck.

Okay, guess we're going to pretend that this didn't happen.

https://www.nintendolife.com/news/2018/06/pokemon_lets_go_pikachu_and_eevee_creators_share_all_the_details_you_need_in_new_q_and_a

Edit: got ninja

So this pisses me off. Never needed a online subscription to trade Pokémon before. So won’t be using this feature. And if this ends up being the case for the 2019 game I will be done with Pokémon forever

This is a surprise to who? They said you're gonna need the pass to play online, and, GASP!, turns out you need the pass to play online.

I swear, if every new game that comes out has an article like this...

@Zuljaras Local communications between all games doesn't require the pass! 😊

The messaging for these 2 games is a complete mess, seems like the best option is still just to wait for E3.

they say it won't require Switch Online Services now they are saying it is?

"To use the internet, you must have the internet!" There is, absolutely nothing wrong with this.

In fact, it is good that the online subscription is required to use the online features even in a casual game like this. I firmly hope that every single game with online functionality requires the subscription to use the online features. If that is not the case, we will have endless debates and arguments about why game X requires it when game Y doesn't and game Z only needs it for certain features...

No, it absolutely should be all or nothing. And people need to get over themselves and plan to get a subscription. It is not expensive. 20 dollars a year is extremely reasonable, and much cheaper than rival services. People have complained for years about Nintendo's sub-par online services. Nintendo charging for it will encourage Nintendo to put more time and effort into improving it those features. In the past, those online features were nothing but a cost for Nintendo, now they are profitable.

@DandaraLHH No, I suspect we will still be paying for that, so long as the service is on 3DS as well. It might change when Bank comes to Switch. But don't bet on it.

@Heavyarms55 "And people need to get over themselves and plan to get a subscription. It is not expensive. 20 dollars a year is extremely reasonable, and much cheaper than rival services."

Yuck. Your opinion would be easier to swallow if we stopped comparing it to rival services which were free and more fully featured than Nintendo's offering twelve years ago. It's cheap for a reason, and it ain't good. I'd rather pay more to have a platform that was up to par. Also, telling people to get over themselves makes my skin crawl.

@ryancraddock right..... 🙄

Yep, Not touching this until reviews come out. Lots of them

@Aozz101x It might have been a bad translation at the Q&A, or they confused the question to mean something differently.

@Pokefanmum82 You can still trade with people in real life, I am also sure 20$ a year isn't going to break your bank. If you have more than 2 friends that have a Switch you can do the family fee which covers 8 consoles...

I'm not paying for P2P connections (outside my isp costs).

@Heavyarms55 Remember whenNintendo first announced the service, and said we’d be trying it out until the paid period starts? Well the crappy internet you’re currently experiencing is what you’ll get when you start paying for it. You’ve been experiencing it this whole time.

I figured this was going to happen. I don't mind paying for online, but Nintendo needs to figure it out and improve what they have. I better not see myself getting dropped out of a Splatfest 40% of the time once I start paying for it.

@Heavyarms55 agree completely. Takes subs to make subs. I’ve also not had any issues in MK8 or the Aces demo. In Southeast USA, fwiw

@Shellcore There are countless people whining and complaining nonstop about a service that we don't even have the full details about. People are never happy. Frankly I am absolutely sick of it. No one is being forced to buy it. We all knew from before the Switch was even launched, that a paid online service was coming. No one forced anyone to buy a Switch and no one is forcing anyone to buy an online subscription. I say people need to get over themselves because they want a service, provided for free, that Nintendo is under no obligation to provide for free. Video games are a luxury, not a right, online services are a luxury on top of a luxury as well. If you or anyone else believes the services are not worth it, speak with your wallet and don't buy it.

@Thisismycomment Functionally, there is nothing crappy about it. Mario Kart and Splatoon 2 as examples, show it works just fine for game play. Other features are going to be added as the paid service launches. Not satisfied, don't pay for it.

I’ve had plenty of drops during ARMS and Mario Tennis Aces.

@MoonKnight7 What exactly do you mean by dropped? When I have played in Splatfests, I haven't experienced significant problems. I think I have been disconnected mid-game in Splatoon 2... maybe 2 or 3 times since the game launched.

@Heavyarms55 "I think I have been disconnected mid-game in Splatoon 2... " — that’s what it means. Dropped game = internet disconnects.

So you’ve experienced it too, yet you’re telling us the internet is great. 🙄

@Thisismycomment Well the term isn't what my friends and I use. Most people I know either say "disconnected" or "DC". So I wasn't sure what they meant. Either way, I seriously question it being Nintendo's fault, rather than people's router, or the ISP. Because 40% "drop" rates are massively worse than anything I have experienced. If I was getting rates that bad, I'd be pretty angry to, and though I still would question my router or ISP first, unless there were lots of other people having the same issues.

@Thisismycomment Also, no, I never called it great. But yes, I have experienced it. 2 or 3 times since the game launched. And I can't think of a single time it has happened to me in Mario Kart 8, which I have had since launch as well.

@Heavyarms55 I’ve never had a problem with Rocket League, that game runs buttery smooth on Switch. They also use their own servers. I only seem to experience issues with first-party games.

@Jokerwolf that’s not the point I am trying to make. The reason why I am pissed is my opinion and solely my opinion. I just think that it should have been free. I’m still getting the games and the subscription but I will not be doing any trading online.

@Heavyarms55

Let me clarify, it usually isn't during a game, but after — when everyone is ready to go to the next match. I am constantly getting a "communication error" and I get kicked out of Splatfests. Doesn't happen often at all for regular matchups, but for Splatfests, I'm dropped roughly 30-40% of the time. It's really annoying, especially if you have a good team together.

@Damo So you think eurogamer is more credible than NintendoEverything? Because NE is what said online is a yes, but Ryan didn’t believe it. Yet Eurogamer says online is a yes and this article is created.

@NewAdvent I was talking about GTS, Wonder Trade, etc.

@Damo The title of the NintendoEverything article CLEARLY says "The Pokemon Company clarifies plans for online in Pokemon: Let’s Go, Pikachu / Eevee once and for all"

I’ll repeat myself, having The Pokemon Company speak to anyone other than Eurogamer isn’t good enough. Famitsu is a well known Japanese publication, I guess this means nothing.

Original article:
https://www.famitsu.com/news/201806/01158241.html
NE English post:
https://nintendoeverything.com/the-pokemon-company-clarifies-plans-for-online-in-pokemon-lets-go-pikachu-eevee-once-and-for-all/

Now stop trying to defend Ryan, he should have fixed the article appropriately instead of just adding a little bit of extra text but still reject it in the article after I mentioned it to him.

Don’t lie to me and say there was no info at the time, because there was. How dare you continue this charade! Instead of just letting it go, you just had to continue to annoy me.

So just like xbox live and ps+ - you need it for online features...

"So it begins"... yes correct - games using online features need to cheapest online pass of the three from September... just as the model would suggest...

I don't see any panic or anything surprising here.

Hmm... It seems that the people asking questions are really bad about accepting answers and not trying to clarify or follow up. And no, I'm not talking about the "no plans at this time" thing.

But rather, the language of "Battling and trading with other players over the internet or locally will be available in these games. ... An active membership for the Nintendo Switch Online service ... will be required to access these features." makes it sound like both online and local activities will require the Online service. Which is a big deal that speaks volumes about the attitude towards the Online service moving forward.

Does that imply all activites will go through the online service, even if local and within proximity of each other? Does that imply you can't engage in local interactions if an internet connection is not available to both participants? Would that be implied to be howmthings will work moving forward? If so, Then why put local communication capability in the console in the first place?

Why were these thoughts not had by the "journalists" who are getting info on this stuff? Why has this of all things been left unclarified? How is it that "we have no plans to report at this time" isn't taken at face value and dug into, but statements with blatant implications by way of syntax are let to rest as they are?

@Damo You might want to stop lying to people.

Well then, looks like I won't be using online features in the 2019 game. Though I bet they'll lock some stuff behind the online features to bait people into getting the sub.

Cya
Raziel-chan

@Mathias_Wolfbrok Pokémon Bank shouldn’t be a separate service though. It’s ridiculously overpriced just to store some fake monsters or transfer them.

@Thisismycomment mUh GaWd, It’S fAkE nEwS!

@NIN10DOXD It shouldn't be, but it's the way it is.

Because guess what? It sells.

@DandaraLHH asking the real questions.

@Yorumi "divide the community"? Pretty much every owner of a PS or Xbox console has no problem paying for a much more expensive service and in the Nintendo community there are even a lot of people happy about being able to pay for online in hope for better servers.

I don't like paying either, but the Pokémon community is probably being "divided" into 99.998% of gamers paying for online and 0.002% of gamers not paying (not counting those that have no interest in playing online anyway), just like the overall Nintendo community.

And, to be honest, I will be part of the bigger group too, because I don't want to miss out on stuff and I don't see a point in boycotting when the masses are aparently OK with it.
At least the Nintendo service is cheap...

@Mathias_Wolfbrok I'm not so sure it sells. I don't know anybody who pays for Pokemon Bank personally. I've bought and beaten every game multiple times, but haven't once felt tempted to pay for the service. It's a ripoff when they could easily put more pc boxes in the game.

@NIN10DOXD Well you've got to remember that transferring between generations is also locked behind the Bank paywall, as well as providing for -you guessed it- backup capabilities. (That aren't even that reliable in the first place) And that won't go any better once Gen 8 is here and the Bank's on the Switch. But I agree with you, it's a ripoff.

People like us either know better or hacked their 3DS into oblivion anyways though, but the basic customer you never hear of? Yeah, he'll cough up 15 € a year to make sure his data's safe.

Also there's the fact that Pokémon Bank and the Nintendo Online service aren't even handled by the same entity, even though both are owned by Nintendo to an extent.

Not surprising and no big deal. Was purchasing a 12 month subscription regardless because I play Splatoon 2 and Mario Kart 8 Deluxe online a lot anyway.

Online has been debunked and confirmed for this title so many times since it's been announced now, I'm not sure what to believe...

@Yorumi I don't completely agree with the "held hostage" part and I would also argue that there are servers involved in almost all relevant cases.
My point is just that servers are by far not expensive enough to need this kind of funding.
Just as you wrote, other companies use servers as well without a fee being required. Especially Steam needs to be mentioned, it is probably the best online service in existence, yet it costs absolutely nothing to use (though with the current development, I wouldn't even be surprised if that changes some day...)

I don't even blame Nintendo. With how agreeing people are, it would be downright stupid of them as a company to not take advantage of that.
I blame the masses that accepted this nonsense starting with XBOX Live and later with PSN hammering down the fact that consumers aparently don't care about paying extra. (I remember many Sony fanboys laughing about Xbox Live costing money, the moment Sony announced the same, they were all suddenly quiet...)
At this point it is just become normal for console online services to cost money.

@NIN10DOXD I've used Pokemon Bank and haven't had any issues with it. Its a quick way to transfer Pokemon from game to game. It isn't that expensive and on the off years where you don't have a new game to transfer your Pokemon to, you don't need to renew it again until then. Would it be nice to have this option for free? Of course. But $5.00 isn't gonna break the bank and its one less venti iced latte I'll be buying that year.

@Heavyarms55 Agree with you in that it's not like we found out yesterday you were gonna have to pay for the online service. We knew this from the jump.

@Heavyarms55 “No, it absolutely should be all or nothing”.

I actually agree there. There should be no exceptions. But you also ask us to ~get over ourselves~ and accept “all” by default. Why? “Nothing” is still an option, and one every consumer would take if asked. Why should we all gladly pay for what has been free so far? No amount of NES games will ever make up for that, what gives here? Nintendo didn’t operate at a loss when online trading was free on the 3DS and they certainly wouldn’t start doing so now. And I’m pretty sure they’ve been making profit ever since Switch launched with free online. Unless they offer a package greater than what’s already in place, you are asking everyone to just hand over their money and be happy about it, which, unless you work for Nintendo, doesn’t make sense defending (to me).

I'm not sure how it's newsworthy to say that online features of a November release game will require a paid subscription to the Nintendo Online service that launches in december, of which it's been known since Switch launched would be required to play online components of games.....but whatever.

Maybe Dom can update yesterday's Fallout 76 article to remind us that online portions will require an active subscription to PSN or XBL if not buying on PC?

@Yorumi As always, though, these companies have investors to answer to. Investors who are mostly bankers.

I know your pet peeve is online subscriptions but that's just a tip of the iceberg. The fleecing going on through every single level of commerce, beyond subscriptions, the shrinking sizes of products as prices stay the same or increase across the board (remember 5lb bags of sugar? Then they were 4.5. Now they're 4.2! Remember when ice cream came in half gallons...now they come in "portions.") What fuels it, investors. Bankers. Bankers that invest and control the boards of every public company and thus control EVERYTHING worldwide, to generate as much transfer of wealth to themselves from everyone below themselves. Public businesses did not used to be this centrally bank/fund/investment firm controlled going back a few decades.

"Valve does it free", yes, and valve has no investors, and to a degree the core product they sell is their "freeness"....though, so does Google and Facebook, but we all know their "free" is far too expensive.

Not a defense of subscriptions (heck with the $35/yr 8 accts plan Nintendos' almost phoning it in because they have to.) but an indictment that focusing on subs ignores the real major problem. And yes, online even matchmaking and security costs money. Money they didn't have to spend 10 years ago. The investors want that money accounted for....and if it can be turned into additional revenue, they'll insist on that as well.

Unsurprising. It’ll be the case with most games with online multiplayer in the future. At least NSO is cheap.

@Damo @ryancraddock Fair enough. I did find it weird that 3 other sites that popped in my news feed said the opposite when it came to online play around the same day that article came out. It's easy to mistranslate and miscommunicate.

In my case it was less on the article/ryan it/himself and more on the reactions of some people. Quick to write off without waiting to learn more because of an game change.

@Yorumi It's a plague in the 21st century starting at the late 90s, and just amping up since. The investors are the root cause of most problems, and the investors that matter are the banks and "financial services" institutions. It's not just just creative enterprise. The very concept of "publicly traded companies" is destructive to almost everything but its investors. It depended on an honor system of investors taking interest in the long term growth of a company rather than short term gains. But, at least in the West, honor died a long time ago, and investors learned that short term gains are massive as you leave a burning ruin on your exit. Lenin was right when he said that Socialism just leads to Communism. But the one he missed was: "Capitalism leads to Socialism leads to Communism." They just all get there a little more slowly. The public trading of companies has lead to tight control by a relatively small group of individuals and organizations that hold the decision making power over almost all business, and through business and its lobbies, has almost full control over govermental policies. Worse, their control and reach is worldwide, all at once. The result is something not so different from centrally planned Socialist and Communist nations, just padded and painted a little prettier. Everyone always describes "Fascism" forgetting that that's not an actual system, it was a colloquialism for national socialism coined by Mussolini.....it's a facile....a face...a front...window dressing for the collusion of state and business operating as one. Which is essentially what we currently have via the investment banking system.

The difference between now and the robber barons is the robber barons had smaller scope and control. It wasn't centralized through the "information economy" where trends, interests, and results are instantaneous and shared to all. With that, exploitation and manipulation are maximized. The masses succeed based on the inefficiencies and slack in the system...that's what creates a prosperous economy of a middle class. The information economy leads to almost perfect efficiency. And with no slack in a perfectly efficient system, there is only a top and bottom and no middle. We're edging ever closer to that.

Video game subs are just a tiny visible node of that.

I'm pretty sure the Switch Online Service is the reason they're releasing Let's Go and Smash Switch when they are, to try and get everybody to subscribe to it when they're hyped up about the new games without worrying if it's really worth the cost or not.

The trick to subscription services is getting people to subscribe for the first time, after that they are much more likely to keep renewing.

I like it

@Yorumi I'll join you. I'll bring Switches and LAN adapters.

@MoonKnight7 that is weirder still. Are you playing Splatfests for a different region perhaps?

This shouldn’t be news...

Kinda makes sense.

Ehh, I plan on skipping this game anyhoo.

This super-casual spinoff is starting to sound interesting. The idea of a Pokemon game with no GTS or online battling brings up thoughts of playing the originals when you had to find someone with the right pokemon in order to trade. I'm actually really looking forward to these, they'll be a fun departure from the norm. Don't get me wrong though, I'd be frustrated if any of this was here to stay. For one game, it seems like a lot of fun.

@Heavyarms55

Nope, just in my region. I know it's weird, I didn't have problems like this in Splatoon 1. I mean, I at least make it to the end of the match and get the points for it, but like I said, it's annoying if you stumbled across a good team.

@MoonKnight7 That is really odd and I wish I had some advice to offer you. But while I can't say I have never experienced that, it's no where near as frequent as you describe. If it is only with Splatoon 2 and only during Splatfests... hmm do you have the downloaded version of the game? If so try deleting and re-downloading it. Perhaps there is some weird bug with your copy.

@Pokefanmum82 Of course you never needed a subscription to trade mon's before, this is the first time Nintendo implemented a paid subscription service for the online features. That is like saying you've never paid to play Mario Kart, SSB or Splatoon online before. It's a new thing that we've known about for over a year at this point.

Mark my words: All the previous online games (Splatoon 2, ARMS, Mariokart 8 Deluxe) will be patched so you have to pay for online.

@Heavyarms55

Nope, it isn't a download, I have a physical copy of the game. I play a few other online games too like Payday 2 and Rocket League, and don't have problems like that. I'm actually pleasantly surprised how stable Rocket League is, kudos to them. I guess we'll see what happens when Fortnite and Paladins launch, but I think it's something specifically with Splatoon.

No worries friend, I appreciate your commitment to try to get to the bottom of it, but it's really hard to pinpoint what the problem is. I know I'm not the only one though, cause I listen to the NVC podcast and when Splatoon started doing their Splatfests, they mentioned the "communication error" was happening to them too — but it's good to know it doesn't happen to everybody like yourself. So I guess it isn't a widespread problem. It doesn't break the game for me, it's easy enough to just jump back into a match. It's just a slight annoyance, and it's just something I hope gets fixed, especially once I start paying for it. It's certainly not going to stop me from playing, I love that game wayyy to much lol.

@MoonKnight7 I wonder if it is perhaps a regional thing. Depending on where the servers are located relative to the players. Or perhaps certain ISPs work better or worse with Nintendo's servers...