Woof, not looking good right out of the gate for Nintendo. At least with PS+ and XBLG there's some trade-offs to keep them balanced, but the Switch service looks to be strictly worse. Now, they could CHANGE that and course correct like Microsoft has been doing, but wishful thinking (shit-posting) might not change that much.
The Free NES/SNES Game You Get With Switch Online Only Valid For One Month
- Thread starter Steven Bogos
- Start date
not entirely true. not anymore. the 360 iteration didn't require an active gold sub, but when the X1 came out, that policy changed, and you can no longer play the free games without an active sub. this doesn't retroactively apply to 360 titles, and as far as i know, the 360 GWG still don't require gold, though i feel like i heard that changed for the worse as well recently.Petromir said:
That micro SDXC theoretically supports up to 2tb, so it's all chill. Who cares if the avaliable 512 gb ones cost almost as much as the Switch itself, it's Zelda man!Johnny Novgorod said:
Oh Nintendo. Every time. Every time I think you might be changing, every time I give you the benefit of the doubt, you never fail to let me down. You will always find a way to ruin a good thing. I'm quickly losing sight of why I cared. You caught my interest with SMT and Zelda, but that's not enough to buy your console. I suspect we have another failure on our hands, all because Nintendo doesn't understand how competition works. They have a weaker console, a weaker library, a weaker fan base, and a weaker online service, and yet they want to charge a premium for their console. It appears their new president isn't going to save the company after all.
I am a Nintendo fan.Johnny Novgorod said:
*cough*
Fuck that noise. (I am however, not a highly insecure, easily led fan) The gimmicky ness was already sticking fast to this, the launch library is sparse and unpromising. The battery life is still highly unimpressive to play for any time on a game worth it's salt. The memory!? And the pricepoint?!
Not impressed with this showing at all, I hope they enjoy having a second Wii U on their hands because at this point I can't think of anything to defend it with. They can't have a family friendly toy-gaming machine and a PC-esque gaming console all at once, well they can, but they've compromised in both columns and are going to end up pleasing neither demographic.
...sooo, not only are they doing the same thing as PS+ and Xbox Gold by charging a subscription fee instead of having free access to multiplayer, they're also going to be offering a worse service than the Playstation and Xbox? Seriously? Who the fuck thought this was a good idea? Whoever they are they should be thrown into the company Yoshi pit for criminal stupidity.
Another Nintendo fan here, just adding the fact I agree with you completely. I'll prob get it, but I don't play console games online, so I won't be paying that fee. However, I do pay for PS+ because for the price of a cheap lunch per month, I can play games that I haven't bought, and I have found to get a decent amount out of them. But not in the very month I got them. Luckily these are old games, so I can just use an emulator on my PC I guess, if I cared.Charli said:
It seems like a poor deal. The competition allows you to keep playing the games until the subscription is cancelled, so there is still some sort of deadline stress with the competition. The latter is however preferable since the consumer is actually in control.
The only sliver of hope to turn this deal into a more agreeable one would be if the service is very inexpensive. That, or if the NES/SNES game of the month turn out to be entirely of the player's choosing(e.g. "For June I chose Super Metroid, for July Mario All stars, for August Mario All Stars again, I hadn't finished it..."). The description leaves that possibility open, though I frankly do not think that is the case.
The only sliver of hope to turn this deal into a more agreeable one would be if the service is very inexpensive. That, or if the NES/SNES game of the month turn out to be entirely of the player's choosing(e.g. "For June I chose Super Metroid, for July Mario All stars, for August Mario All Stars again, I hadn't finished it..."). The description leaves that possibility open, though I frankly do not think that is the case.
Hahaha, no. I bet you are getting Balloon Fight or whatever old toss Nintendo wants to throw at their fans that month. Just some old old game that nobody even cared about at launch. Like ... what is probably mostly floating around in their virtual store right now.Bedinsis said:
Also, I bet, like with previous consoles, they are going to relaunch that virtual store, so the Switch will be looking at an empty store front and only a small drip feed of old games to fill it.
Well, fuck you, too, Nintendo.
No. I mean it. This is a slap in the face. Give me a game like Mario RPG and then take it away before I can finish it? That's a dick move.
Worse yet, these are old games they are giving away. If these were on other services, they probably wouldn't be more than $10 to buy. And PS+ isn't giving away PS1 games for free. It's giving away relatively newer games. Same with XBLG. It's not even worth the money.
How utterly incompetent. To copy what your competition does, but do objectively worse? Might as well not even offered the free game. It would be less insulting to your customers.
No. I mean it. This is a slap in the face. Give me a game like Mario RPG and then take it away before I can finish it? That's a dick move.
Worse yet, these are old games they are giving away. If these were on other services, they probably wouldn't be more than $10 to buy. And PS+ isn't giving away PS1 games for free. It's giving away relatively newer games. Same with XBLG. It's not even worth the money.
How utterly incompetent. To copy what your competition does, but do objectively worse? Might as well not even offered the free game. It would be less insulting to your customers.
Why would you defend it? It gives you absolutely no benefits as far as we know over the WiiU or 3DS, yet it asks you to pay for it. The game is a one month deal. You're forced to use your freaking Smartphone for the communication. Worst online service and they dare to actually charge for it? Why defend a shitty purely anti-consumer practice?Saelune said:
I mean, if you removed all names so that I don't know it's about Nintendo I would expect this to see on Jim's "Oh Ubisoft" or "Fuck Konami" news.
Honestly, at this point I continue my subsrciption more for the discounts than anything. The monthy free games are pretty garbage now.chozo_hybrid said:
Heck, even EA occasionally gives away a free old game on Origin.BiH-Kira said:
And then there is the whole ContentID on youtube, where Nintendo forces adds on add-free channels.
And those take down strikes on Let's Play videos and romhacks.
I can hardly bring myself to say it ... but EA is better than Nintendo at this point.
I hope that they don't cut that down artificially like I think Microsoft did with the 360. Then, this indeed wouldn't be such an issue anymore.Imre Csete said:
The 2TB is going to come out, right? Storage prices keep dropping. If what you say gets interpreted correctly by me, it really won't be such a big problem then.
Cause it might not suck. The idea of paying for something doesnt bother me. If it will be worth it remains to be seen, but I acknowledge it might be worth it.BiH-Kira said:
How do you know it wont be? Too many people are just upset at having to pay at all, regardless if it is worth it or not.
I find the quality comes in waves, but most months there's usually something of interest to me.Casual Shinji said: