Nintendo Switch

1 2 Switch GOTY 2017

  • Yes

    Votes: 14 41.2%

  • Yes

    Votes: 20 58.8%
  • Total voters
    34
You know, I wonder if they are doing this because the price of maintaining online gaming in general has gotten so high that they need to charge to keep it up. That would explain why all 3 console makers now charge for online. However, this is only a theory and I don't have any proof that it's actually expensive to keep up online play.
 
Czario said:
You know, I wonder if they are doing this because the price of maintaining online gaming in general has gotten so high that they need to charge to keep it up. That would explain why all 3 console makers now charge for online. However, this is only a theory and I don't have any proof that it's actually expensive to keep up online play.
Click to expand...

Nintendo's Online Service doesn't use servers, it's entirely peer-to-peer. Additionally, we played Nintendo's online service for free on the Switch with no problems whatsoever prior to the service, with Nintendo not reporting any sort of financial struggles with the console. For game's centric on online multiplayer, the costs for maintaining the service should come the sales of the game. Splatoon 2 and Mario Kart 8 Deluxe are heavy hitters, and there's no doubt about it that Super Smash Bros. Ultimate will become a huge hit in which the profits from the sales should be far more than enough to maintain them. Lastly, the Nintendo Switch has become a huge success, easily dwarfing the Wii U, and I don't think things have gotten much more expensive in the time frame between the Wii U and Switch.

Finally, PC users laugh at all of this, since most PC games don't charge for online, with exceptions of course such as subscriptions for WoW, etc.
 
YFJ said:
This video has 48,000 dislikes, compared to only 8,900 likes. I guess people really don't like online multiplayer becoming paid.
Click to expand...
It's not even that, it's that the services are atrocious and even Nintendrones' responses seem to be "it's not expensive" as if the service magically stops being shitty as long as it's cheap.

Czario said:
You know, I wonder if they are doing this because the price of maintaining online gaming in general has gotten so high that they need to charge to keep it up. That would explain why all 3 console makers now charge for online. However, this is only a theory and I don't have any proof that it's actually expensive to keep up online play.
Click to expand...
Nintendo spent more time on the cute animation and slick advertising than they did with making sure their services are quality. They're not concerned about "it's too expensive", assuming they're struggling on making money (no they're not, they're operating on massive profits more than you will ever make in your life time; two of the largest media franchises rake in literally tens of billions of dollars). This service is testing their fans and to see how much they can get away with ripping off their fans. If this service becomes profitable, I'm expecting them charging higher prices for this sort of service. You give them the inch, they can and will go the mile.

winstein said:
I know for sure that I dread seeing THAT icon if it appears on an eShop game. What's that icon I speak of? It's this:

icon-online-play.png


Never thought that that is an icon I wish is absent in a game. Sure it's a cool icon, but it also represents the advent of paid online services. Sure I can afford it, but there's no incentive as of now.

Thank you for reading.
Click to expand...
Luigi's reaction sums up my reaction. WHAT THE FUCK, NINTENDO? And Mario's the "durr, it's only 20 dollars a year"
 
Oh it's probably already profitable. A large amount of people probably bought it cause fuck it it's 20 dollars. I know cause I was one of those people.
If you think enough people are gonna boycott this and force Nintendo to change you're wrong. Cause at the end of day it's probably already profitable and once smash Bros comes out a lot of people that don't have it now will get it then.
 
Honoka's #5 Fan said:
If you think enough people are gonna boycott this and force Nintendo to change you're wrong. Cause at the end of day it's probably already profitable and once smash Bros comes out a lot of people that don't have it now will get it then.
Click to expand...
I didn't think it was gonna happen. It's something called a "pipe dream".

I mean, I'd probably buy it if I owned more online-compatible games. The only one I own is Mario Kart 8 Deluxe, which isn't worth the subscription because I also own the Wii U version with free online. The NES games were cool but aren't worth it, since I can just own the games of my choosing forever through Wii U VC.
 
Hell if you think I'm naive enough to believe a boycott is going to work especially not when people need online play to play their favorite games and play with their friends, and Nintendo is known specifically for having a fanbase whose loyalties are stuck so far in their orifices it's embedded into their DNA. That being said, collectively, a boycott won't work but I am not going to drop $20 for a scam-tier service we had free for a year (and I'd imagine that one free year we all had didn't exactly dent their bank accounts) and tried touting it as a feature. Yes, they warned us it will be paid but that doesn't justify this crap and neither does my cynical anticipating that this service will profit despite being garbage justify it either.
 
I feel that online subscription is the direction that Nintendo wanted to travel to, and MyNintendo is kind of a sign of things to come. It cannot be denied that if an online subscription is required, then it will be profitable. Even for Playstation and Xbox, online subscriptions are one of their most profitable ventures. Of course their services are a lot better so they seem tolerable in their audacity. I feel that eventually I might have to get online subscription since Splatoon 2 is one of the games I have (which is pretty much an online game for all intents and purposes).

I do wonder how profitable this venture would be if online play is not one of the services. After all, I only considered this subscription because of online play. I imagine it would be significantly less profitable because online play is the biggest reason to use the service, and without this, the major features that are left are cloud saves and the NES games (which might not appeal to everyone). The proposition would have to be significantly jam-packed with value to get people to pay, similar to how PS3 and Vita managed to get people to pay for PS+ even though online play is free on those platforms, because they have things like free games and deeper discounts (cloud saves are available too, but it's mainly the two items that made it attractive). I think Nintendo Switch should aim for this too: online play remains free, but the other features are granted with the subscription so that when time comes for a Switch upgrade to require a fee for online, then there are enough features to make it a wholesome service.

Thank you for reading.