Gaming Would you pay for a Nintendo Online Service?

[Nollog]

3DS Buzz: Why can’t online play work with a gamer ID and a child lock similar to the 3D child lock instead of awkward friend codes?

James Honeywell: Our approach to the online gaming experience has been firm and consistent – it needs to be simple, safe and free. We feel a responsibility to make the online experience as enjoyable as possible for as many people as possible and whilst we fully understand and accept that not everyone is happy with friend codes we believe that with 3DS we have taken steps to address many concerns whilst retaining our core principles that make our online experience so enjoyable for so many people. With 3DS users need only input one code for the hardware – codes are no longer software dependent – this was a frequent comment from DS users and something we addressed with 3DS.

James Honeywell is Nintendo UK’s Head of Marketing.

Given his response, I thought to myself "I'd pay a nominal fee if it meant the system was easier, and made sense."

So, would you pay $1, €1, £1, ¥100 on a monthly basis for a single Nintendo Online Account which you could link to your 3DS, or other Nintendo console?
It would contain your purchases in any Nintendo Shop, a personal Nickname which would be used in the place of friend codes, gaming stats across Nintendo devices you use, and maybe link your purchases to the loyalty schemes Nintendo run in Japan, Europe and the US etc like Star Points.

Just $1 a month for 130 million people would generate 130 million dollars to run this service, and the cost to run would likely be 10% of that.

 

[Juanmatron]

The fuck. Pay for the SAME what we use from 10 years old?

130 million of clients? Even PS2 hasn't 130 million costumers.

 

[stanleyopar2000]

FUCK NO.

 

[SmokeFox]

I dont pay for cards itself imagine if i would pay for this thing.

 

[aiRWaLKRe]

I would if it was not some outrageous fee, and if it offered services indicative of the fee

 

[Rock Raiyu]

No. That's one of the many reasons why I don't like XBL.

 

[DeMoN]

Rofl at the poll results. Eight people voted no and no one for yes.
Besides, the real reason isn't money, it's children safety.

 

[awssk8er]

No, I'm extremely against pay to play services unless it's an MMO.

Not even the fact of spending money, it's just another headache you have to worry about.

If Nintendo charged for an online service, it would have to be better than XBL. But I can never see them charging for online.

 

[Ikki]

No. Paying for online gaming while paying for internet is plain stupid.

 

[Deleted_171835]

If it's only a $1 a month, I would definitely pay for it.
That's something that should have came for free with the online service, though. It would be a pretty dick move by Nintendo to charge for that. I wish Nintendo had a way to link all your purchases to a central account, though. As in your WiiWare, DSiWare and 3DSWare are all on a single account so if your Wii/DSi/3DS breaks, you can get them back. I wouldn't mind an achievement based system. There's something addicting about trying to get every achievement on a game. I wish Nintendo didn't have such an ancient online system.

 

[Supreme Dirt]

I would pay for a service that was top of the line.

Unfortunately, this is Nintendo we're talking about. I've played games that aren't Pokémon over their WiFi, would not play again.

 

[M[u]ddy]

If you take a closer look at the 3DSes online system, you see that the friendcode system now works just as good as the other consoles friend systems.
The reason people complained about friendcodes was, because they were executed very bad.

I would also never pay for online service. The only reason I go online is, to purchase download titles and I will not pay to be able to purchase something.

 

[Nollog]

The fuck. Pay for the SAME what we use from 10 years old?

130 million of clients? Even PS2 hasn't 130 million costumers.

I just took the install base of the DS as an example, the actual number of clients would be something like 70 million worldwide.
Still a huge profit.

Why would you expect such huge quality for $1?
The fact it's $1 also keeps children safe/nintendo safe from outlandish claims, since it requires payment in some form either by the parent, or child themselves which the parent should be responsible for, since children do not pull money from their balls on a monthly basis.

Believe it or not, the servers Sony and Nintendo use cost money, and paying a tiny amount each would ensure a better service than we currently get for free.

Too bad, it's the only way we'll get a half way decent online service from Nintendo and you lot expect it for free for no good reason.
Online multiplayer sure, it's always been free, but an integrated service can not be free forever.

 

[MeritsAlone]

I have already said this for Activision pay2play CoD and i will say that to this as well
F*** NO

 

[bigpaws]

i feel that the online service should be included with the purchase price
$1 a year would be resonable but
i find it to be just like online games
take mario kart ds for example
there has to be online servers for worldwide play
we dont pay for them in subscription, rather we pay for it buy buying the game

 

[yuyuyup]

I'd pay up to $4 a month if it really was worth that much, but I would not pay over $4 a month

 

[GameWinner]

FUCK NO.

 

[Vigilante]

Just stay with Xbox live

 

[Nollog]

Just stay with Xbox live
Nobody in this topic mentioned they had a subscription to xbox live.

QUOTE(MeritsAlone @ Feb 13 2011, 09:45 PM) I have already said this for Activision pay2play CoD and i will say that to this as well
F*** NO

That's a single game.
This would be a system for Accounts to be used in the console itself, independent of games.

Think of it like PSN Plus, and not paying as PSN regular.
You don't get free stuff and bull like that, but instead get basic features which should be part of Nintendo's online strategy already.
Nintendo don't produce for a loss, so this would be the only way any of us would get something which requires any kind of backend system.