Nintendo Switch: Thread 06

[wakka]

It’s not terribly expensive, but that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t criticise it. There are precious few online games for Switch and some free NES titles isn’t much of a sweetener.

More than anything, it feels like a huge missed opportunity. If Nintendo put their back into making the eShop the home of classic games from their machines and elsewhere, with a few added to a PSN style ‘Instant Games Collection’ for free for subscribers each month and many others for sale, it would be absolutely brilliant. I’d gladly put my hand in my pocket for that. They could even charge more than £18 if it was really worthwhile. Cash + goodwill from fans - now that would be a real win win.

[dataDave]

I'd like a tiered approach. No way am I paying for old hat which I already own across twelve other platforms.

[replicashooter]

Cash + goodwill from fans - now that would be a real win win.

this is Nintendo we're talking about here, right? Goodwill? Good will? Is that another way of saying "**** you, pay me?"



"Take these ROMs we've dripfed and sold to you at top whack dozens of times and buy them one more time, when we let you. Bitches!"


Personally I think the Switch is a load of hype, starry eyed dreams and what people want it to be as opposed to what it is, thus far. Sure this will likely change ala 3DS toward the middle of its life but as it stands the platform really isn't all that in my eyes, especially with its anemic port laden catalogue and ridiculously overpriced carts. The concept is nice but it isn't the quantum leap I'd been hoping for from N as the support is still slim at best and its still a second console and nowhere near a main platform in terms of what a PS4 and even Xbone can offer.

It is, to me at least, very much a poor rich mans Vita except that it isn't anywhere near as good and nor does it have as many spectacular, varied titles as Sonys red haired stepchild of a handheld.

Whats crazy is that it does have an immense amount of potential, especially if they create novel joy cons for interacting with certain games like a fishing rod, maracas etc.. but none of the devs seem to be using the hardware like that as all that gets pimped is its home portable aspect and thats it plus you already know how I feel about the huge missed opportunity to make Dreamcast Joycons and give it that platform on VC as the hardware can handle the console and the potential is there but the will is not as drones just keep on snapping up whatever N throw at them.

[wakka]

I'd like a tiered approach. No way am I paying for old hat which I already own across twelve other platforms.

You're not getting much for your £18 as it is. Eh, it's just a thought. The current approach just isn't particularly exciting or interesting, which is a shame.

[Asura]

What bothers me even more is that the games aren't even getting dedicated servers. Splatoon 2 is peer-to-peer, as is ARMS.

Like you're not paying for a tangible service. On Xbox Live, Microsoft at least were able to claim they had to run servers for the friends service and party chat capabilities; that was something of a joke because they do that for free with Skype anyway, but it was something, like they had to employ some people and run some servers.

When you subscribe to World of Warcraft, you're paying for two things; continued development on the game with fixes and features, and then the costs to maintain the physical servers, the building in which they are housed, and the staff who look after them. This is similar for Netflix or a bunch of other services.

Nintendo will require a matchmaking server for their games, admittedly, but that's it, and most PC games just do that for free anyway as it costs peanuts.

The other problem with Nintendo's offering is that payments for the service itself can't really go on ARMS or Splatoon 2 because not everyone owns them, and if they think they can get people to pay for their service in order to improve it (like add the features people expect) then they might be in for a rude awakening.

This whole thing is just odd. Back when they announced it, I assumed they had some kind of Labo-esque novel idea waiting in the wings, but it doesn't seem like it at all. I am curious to see how the online-enabled NES stuff works out, but then I'm not a typical customer.

[Dogg Thang]

I'm guessing most people would play the NES games for about 7 minutes combined and never again.

[Neon Ignition]

The NES games are really just a very lazy, poor way of them trying to mask what their subscription really is, a fine on the userbase. Even if they were to tie it to everything going forward, it feels particularly cynical to retroactively apply it to games that have been on the market for ages. Pretty much just penalising early adopters and those who have contributed to Nintendo being able to turn the tide this gen.

Like Asura says, it'd be different if there was any sense that it was part of a plan to invest in the infrastructure like MS and Sony did but with Nintendo it reeks of ripping off the userbase.

It really is a boost that Nintendo is so poor at online gaming. I'm still struggling to think of any games that would necessitate online access. Smash online is gubbins, Mario Kart 9 is likely a very long way away, Animal Crossing would use it but again hardly be for anything essential, same for Pokémon. you quickly come around to 2-3 years time when they knock out Splatoon 3.

It's like the DK: Tropical Freeze pricing. You want Nintendo to do well in the hope you'll get a system with great, regular games but they're insanely quick to corrupt their approach with greed and cheapness and it always ends up costing them their audience.

Next month really is very important for them. They need the line up they announce to be absolutely stellar as they're riding on good will fumes at the moment.

[Asura]

It really is a boost that Nintendo is so poor at online gaming. I'm still struggling to think of any games that would necessitate online access. Smash online is gubbins, Mario Kart 9 is likely a very long way away, Animal Crossing would use it but again hardly be for anything essential, same for Pokémon. you quickly come around to 2-3 years time when they knock out Splatoon 3.

I actually wonder if we're underestimating this.

Maybe Nintendo have a big, online Pokemon title on-the-go. People have wanted such a thing for years; I mean I'm not one of them but I know they exist.

[cutmymilk]

Last night it took a while for some games of splatoon 2 to fill up. As soon as this hits it will be barren. Stupid move.

[cutmymilk]

The NES games are really just a very lazy, poor way of them trying to mask what their subscription really is, a fine on the userbase. Even if they were to tie it to everything going forward, it feels particularly cynical to retroactively apply it to games that have been on the market for ages. Pretty much just penalising early adopters and those who have contributed to Nintendo being able to turn the tide this gen.

Like Asura says, it'd be different if there was any sense that it was part of a plan to invest in the infrastructure like MS and Sony did but with Nintendo it reeks of ripping off the userbase.

It really is a boost that Nintendo is so poor at online gaming. I'm still struggling to think of any games that would necessitate online access. Smash online is gubbins, Mario Kart 9 is likely a very long way away, Animal Crossing would use it but again hardly be for anything essential, same for Pokémon. you quickly come around to 2-3 years time when they knock out Splatoon 3.

It's like the DK: Tropical Freeze pricing. You want Nintendo to do well in the hope you'll get a system with great, regular games but they're insanely quick to corrupt their approach with greed and cheapness and it always ends up costing them their audience.

Next month really is very important for them. They need the line up they announce to be absolutely stellar as they're riding on good will fumes at the moment.

The only games I actually like to play online are MK8 and Splatoon 1 and 2. So they have me by the balls a bit, unless this kills the online component. I have PS+ solely for the free games that I never play!

[Protocol Penguin]

Is Famicom nostalgia that strong in Japan? I can’t see why else Nintendo would bundle a load of NES old games from ‘83 to ‘86 with a subscription. Unless they can’t be bothered.

[Junko]

Metroid and Pokemon gameplay will be there and rehashes of sonic adventure 1 and 2 , but they are putting way too much emphasis on Smash

[Neon Ignition]

I spent quite a lot of time on Melee, I honestly couldn't explain why I've found each Smash since so utterly unengaging.

I think partially it's because, to an extent, the gameplay is rubbish so a lot rests on fanservice and the last few have felt phoned in on that front, half heartedly regurgitating Melee's ideas.

[wakka]

Rehashes of the Sonic Adventure games? Good lord.

Metroid gameplay would be nice but that's a loooong way off. I think the rest of this year will be quite fallow. Just Yoshi and Smash for Q3/4?

[Neon Ignition]

Hopefully whatever Retro have been working on as well, they've been buried far too long.


On Era they were mentioning that Nintendo were applying to extend the patent for Eternal Darkness, can't imagine it's a new game though given how poorly the fundraiser for that sequel went