The Nintendo Switch Features a Paid Online Service and a Companion Mobile App

[Fulbert]

I agree that having to use a separate device for chatting sounds weird and awkward. But then again, my wife plays Splatoon competitively and uses discord for communicating with her teammates, so that's nothing new, I guess.
The paid multiplayer is a real shame, though.

 

[Fox12]

What do they even have to offer in the realm of online multi-player? Their online service sucks. They better hope their game catalogue knocks it out of the park.

Still, I have a massive stiffy from that SMT teaser.

 

[Wrex Brogan]

Good thing I've never played nintendo games for their stellar (read: God awful) multiplayer service, then. Gonna suck when they do a pokemon game on this thing though.

 

[chozo_hybrid]

It's $550 NZD (equal to $400 usd wit conversion), waaaay to expensive, and that's before getting a pro controller or game. Aussie is getting it for just $500 NZD, so we just get an extra $50 charge for some reason...

Think I'll be holding off, since so far there seems to be very little at launch.

 

[zellosoli]

I'm going to have to say, I don't buy anyone that acts like this was the reason they won't be getting the Switch. Sure, there are Nintendo games that have online for the system, but the only game that really needs it is going to be Splatoon, everything else will either be heavily single-player, or local multiplayer based. Arms, bomberman, Mario Kart, I don't know many people that would absolutely need the online for these, these seem more focused on local multiplayer, not online play. And the same will go for Smash later on, and Monster Hunter. Pokemon might also cause some ruffled feathers, but again, most people play Pokemon for the single player experience with some trading with friends. I'm not trying to defend this idea. It's stupid, especially with Nintendo, as all it's done is cemented that I won't be picking up Monster Hunter or Splatoon, but I think the console will still see a lot of play time from me from the new Mario and Zelda alone. Plus the new Xenoblade game looks fantastic, and SMT is my favorite JRPG series, so I can live with just acting like my Switch doesn't even have online capabilities.

If the service is like $10 a year, they might get me with it, but anything more considering how shite their online is anyway is just absurd. But again, I don't feel burned with this like I did with the PS+ shit and the PS4, because I could never connect my Nintendo console to the Internet and not notice a damn difference.

Speak for Yourself, personally i always hated Zelda and Mario games (smash im not a big fan of either but begrudgingly owned it due to friends) but i really did like some of the other multiplayer titles like splatoon (which was the main draw) and xenoblade cronicles X was pretty decent too (multi was optional but it felt soulless without it), and was looking forward to splat2 and some of the other multiplayer works down the line (hopefully a metroid with a decent multiplayer) but this seems like too much of a hassle for the cost. also i dont know where your getting the "most people only play pokemon for the single player", considering the absolute banality of the story's in pokemon, the online multi-player and social aspect is the only thing going for it. but i digress

besides, i think what going to happen is that nintendo is going to try and force the use of online in more games from here on out, look at the line up, 4 of them are primarily multiplayer games with online in mind, the rest i can see a need for a constant connection in order to access locked out features. business wise, it in nintendo's interest to get as many people paying that 10 per month (which I'm dubious that it will remain there but whatever), so it stands to reason that online features will become more and more mandatory (mario maker anyone?)
that and the fact that nintendo are not releasing all features to all reasons (meaning people living outside of the US and japan like me are screwed from the get go)

all than and the fact that the "free game" you get every month is just a demo (making it have less value than the ps+, if you can believe it) is enough to make me question weather the switch is an investment

hopefully, Nintendo will at least give a bit more value to the subscription at some point, or change some of its policys because right now, its kinda a deal breaker for me

 

[bjj hero]

Am I the only one who thinks that controller on the box looks cramp inducing? The way the buttons are directly over the right stick looks awkward.

 

[klaynexas3]

snip

Well I do stand corrected on that, though if the Xenoblade game is to be closer to a sequel of the original Xenoblade game I have trouble believing there will be extensive online functionality with the game and that it will probably still be closer focused on the over story and world. As for Pokemon almost everyone I've talked to or have seen play really just play the campaign and endgame of Pokemon, with mostly just trading for the multiplayer aspect, not necessarily for the story but just for the sake of catching and raising and battling Pokemon and facing new challenges, hence why I was saying that there would still be ruffled feathers, but I can't imagine them cutting off all forms of trading behind the paywall, so I also don't see that as an extreme deal breaker for many Pokemon players to just do local battles and trading with their friends.

Also, I'm curious where you're getting the $10 a month thing from. That would be a horrendous price point for Nintendo to make, and every news article on the online service, including the Nintendo site, lack a price point. Not even Sony or Microsoft are charging close to that much, and there's no way Nintendo can have a catalogue of games with online functionality and the servers to back those up that could justify having to pay double what the competition makes you pay, when they have will get more online games in a year than a Nintendo console would ever see. If there is a site claiming that $10 a month is the price point and they have a source to back it up, this only hardens me more to the idea that Nintendo will see this service fail as a whole. I suppose I just believe that the console can still do well while this online service stuff can fail, at least I feel there's a better chance of it happening on a Nintendo console than anywhere else. I do apologize to you that they are screwing you out of what you would want the console for, but if it's any consolation, I won't be supporting this part of the bad habit, and have high hopes that only a small fraction of the user base will even pay for the "service," so there is still a chance that they might drop the charge all together, or work to make it something actually worth paying for, and not just hide game functionality behind pay walls. This is what I'm hoping for in the long run, because I would like to try out Splatoon 2, but they are crazy if they think I'll pay anymore than the base price of the game for their shitty servers.

 

[Davroth]

I hope they finally retire the friend code system with that.