Nintendo Switch: Thread 09

[kryss]

Fair play on his art though.

[Nu-Eclipse]

I'm personally grateful for the delay, for a minute I was worried Nintendo were releasing too many interesting Switch titles this year...

Quick, get in touch with Doug Bowser & Furukawa-san and tell 'em that the Switch is a failure because its total sales don't match the combined age of EAD Tokyo!!

[Neon Ignition]

[Asura]

Seeing loads of problems on Twitter about the Switch online service N64 expansion, like for starters how the default button config is bad.

WinBack is one of the games, but it doesn't support the controller memory pak so you can't save; you just use the emulator's save-states. Also means you can't save ghosts in MK64, and I'm seeing some really bad performance videos.

Now... After what happened with Sonic Colors best to wait and see if these are actually real, as some might be fake.

Still, it's unacceptable if any of it is true.

These are ROMs (which cost Nintendo nothing, were paid for years ago to the tune of significant profit, and many of us have bought them on things like the Wii VC) running on an emulator (which was already a solved problem for other consoles, so cheap for Nintendo). The "service", if you like - i.e. the actual application, interface, controls - those are the bit you're paying for. Nintendo have no excuse here; this should be flawless.

[teddymeow]

Do you want to know how the new OLED screen looks like with 40 screen protectors fitted? Or how long can you resist watching someone slowly mutilating a console?

Watched this yesterday and my wife made me turn it off when he started cutting the tops off of the face buttons. She doesn't even like games!! It just made her squirm and cringe

[fishbowlhead]

Seeing loads of problems on Twitter about the Switch online service N64 expansion, like for starters how the default button config is bad.

WinBack is one of the games, but it doesn't support the controller memory pak so you can't save; you just use the emulator's save-states. Also means you can't save ghosts in MK64, and I'm seeing some really bad performance videos.

Now... After what happened with Sonic Colors best to wait and see if these are actually real, as some might be fake.

Still, it's unacceptable if any of it is true.

These are ROMs (which cost Nintendo nothing, were paid for years ago to the tune of significant profit, and many of us have bought them on things like the Wii VC) running on an emulator (which was already a solved problem for other consoles, so cheap for Nintendo). The "service", if you like - i.e. the actual application, interface, controls - those are the bit you're paying for. Nintendo have no excuse here; this should be flawless.

Ah good old Nintendo. Buy the next version on Nintendos new and improved switch2 service though, it’ll definitely be improved, trust us, wink wink.

[Cepp]

Think I'll hold off on the NSO upgrade... Its a shame online play seems so poor on top of the other issues.

[chopemon]

These are ROMs (which cost Nintendo nothing, were paid for years ago to the tune of significant profit, and many of us have bought them on things like the Wii VC)

That's not entirely true. They have to pay for licensing the games they don't own and they have to pay for developing and distributing the Switch Online app and developing the emulator for a new system. There's nothing free in game dev. I'm not saying don't be angry at poor service and I'm not defending any of the issues. I'm just saying don't let irritation with an opt in service lead to youtube drama peddler style hyperbole.

[Asura]

That's not entirely true. They have to pay for licensing the games they don't own and they have to pay for developing and distributing the Switch Online app and developing the emulator for a new system. There's nothing free in game dev. I'm not saying don't be angry at poor service and I'm not defending any of the issues. I'm just saying don't let irritation with an opt in service lead to youtube drama peddler style hyperbole.

The licensing for the games they don't own is almost certainly a sliding scale thing, based on the number of users who take it up. Pretty sure whoever owns Operation WinBack is going to give very flexible terms to convert their annual revenue from that IP from zero to > zero. Years ago that used to be more difficult but these things are generally much more straightforward than they used to be now that most companies are on-board with the idea.

The emulator is for a new system, but the point is that N64 emulation is a solved problem on other systems like the WiiU, meaning that while Nintendo had to make it, it shouldn't have been too difficult a task for them. In any case, given the millions of subscribers they have, this is a miniscule outlay. (EDIT: Actually, scratch that. The emulator's paid up by the sales of Super Mario All-Stars, and fans injected other games into it to prove it was a general purpose emulator).

You're absolutely right about one thing - Nintendo have to develop and distrubute the app. However, I would argue given that people are being asked to pay for the service, this is the bit they're paying for, seeing as the other stuff is relatively minor - and that's what I mean about why this really should be flawless.

[Dogg Thang]

The licensing for the games they don't own is almost certainly a sliding scale thing, based on the number of users who take it up.

If you have information that it works this way, that’s fine because I don’t have any info one way or another. But in absence of that info, there is no way you can take this as a given.

[Asura]

If you have information that it works this way, that’s fine because I don’t have any info one way or another. But in absence of that info, there is no way you can take this as a given.

If Nintendo have given more favourable terms for Operation WinBack then it's a totally different type of screw-up, but a screw-up nonetheless.

What I do know, in a broader licensing context, is that the terms/contracts for retrogames used to be more complex as little as 7 years ago, but these days are much simpler. Publishers have fallen over themselves to restructure/consolidate terms; they're desperate to have people use their back-catalogue as it's been proven it can be lucrative; again, with something like WinBack it turns zero revenue into more than zero, even if it's only a few hundred dollars.

The only exception are games involving things like car licensing; those are as complex as they ever were.

EDIT: This comparison is doing the rounds:

[chopemon]

But that's my point. We don't know these details. We don't know licensing costs. We don't know if it is per download or a lump sum. Whatever your thoughts on what constitutes a "screw up" you can't be sure. Also, is it confirmed it is the same N64 emulator as the 3D All Stars pack? Different emulators have different licensing and restrictions so it may be a different one. And licensing Winback for anything less than a certain amount isn't worth it for Koei. There is a cost to lawyers and producers, even if it is just salaried time to upload the ROM to Dropbox. It may sound stupid, but that's the reality. I've had conversations with major publishers recently where our budget for our next game is so low, it doesn't make sense for the salaries involved for people at their end to work on it (among other things obviously).

My real point here is that the performance issues with the service is unacceptable for the people like me who have bought it. But if you haven't bought it and you're getting worked up over a bunch of theories you cannot confirm, like, maybe it's ok to not be so angry? This isn't just directed at you but at the wider gaming audience. Every time the slightest thing happens that isn't perceived as perfect, gamers have an overblown reaction to it. There is a reason for everything and in this industry, most of those reasons will never be known to us. So it really is ok to look at something that isn't good enough and think, "Huh, that's a shame" and get on with your life without getting worked up about it.

[Asura]

So it really is ok to look at something that isn't good enough and think, "Huh, that's a shame" and get on with your life without getting worked up about it.

I'd rather talk about it in the Nintendo Switch thread.

I also feel that quibbling over the exact terms is ignoring the central issue; can we at least agree with the crux of this - that (1) the costs to Nintendo for this are really quite small compared to, for example, developing another significant game, (2) the amount they could earn off the thousands of subscribers totally dwarfs those costs (to the degree of it being pennies a user) and (3) that means that it should really be pretty much perfect, or they're doing a bad job?

[Dogg Thang]

Yep, really you don’t know and I would be very reluctant to make assumptions. I guess the bottom line is that you said they cost Nintendo nothing and I very much doubt that is true in any way. Doesn’t mean there is any defending the service (I wasn’t getting it regardless of how it turned out - even a good version of this service wouldn’t be worth it for me) but making claims like that doesn’t actually help.

[Asura]

Yep, really you don’t know and I would be very reluctant to make assumptions. I guess the bottom line is that you said they cost Nintendo nothing and I very much doubt that is true in any way. Doesn’t mean there is any defending the service (I wasn’t getting it regardless of how it turned out - even a good version of this service wouldn’t be worth it for me) but making claims like that doesn’t actually help.

I would still say "nothing", because I genuinely feel that something like Mario Kart 64 costs Nintendo "nothing". Maybe not zero but so low as not be an appreciable sum when you divide it among even a few thousand subscribers.

But if you want to take "nothing" to mean literally zero, then yes, you're right, it's not "absolutely free" for Nintendo, but my point is I suspect they're doing this at an enormous markup.