​

With the launch of Nintendo's first premium online service impending, it has today been confirmed it will be launching in the second half of September, adding a little more information to their previous prediction of just the month itself. The service will give users access to online play, a selection of online-enabled NES games, and a much anticipated online save data backup feature.

Will you be buying a Nintendo Switch Online subscription when the service launches? Are you hoping Nintendo will add something more to sweeten the deal? Let us know your thoughts.

Source: GBAtemp Inbox

 

[|<roni&g]

Ok. Now, tell us how you feel about Microsoft & Sony.

Still disappointed to have to pay them (I have xbox1) but as bad as paying for online is, it's more warranted on those systems because there is 30x the choice of multiplayer games to play and they give away good games that actually count each month at least Xbox does.

It's "the players" fault for letting Sony charge for online without putting up a fight, PS3 was free and PS4 should of stayed that way.

Only Nintendo puppets would defend having something free taken away and sold back to them.

Players who play Mario kart 8 on switch are going to sign in after September and be surprised by a feature essentially being removed from their game, and that's a disgrace

 

[Pleng]

Save backup only via online... can't wait for somebody to figure a way to edit saves on the fly from their servers or something egregious like that. Just so they learn.

Learn what?

 

[|<roni&g]

Don't feed the troll. His post is clearly written with pure hatred and if you look closely at the points you will see that alot of them are clearly stolen from other posts in this thread. He obiously just tried to collect as much negative points as possible, not tried to express his opinion. Guess he was sitting there a sad amount of time forcing his brain in a negative mindset to come-up with new points...

I've stolen nothing from anyone else's replies, i've been saying similar shit to this for a few months, maybe people saw some of my older posts and woke up.
Feed the troll, lol.
Negative points are proof what I'm saying is 100% correct there's no debating it.
You tell me why Nintendo should charge for online?
Some of you must work for Nintendo the way you're willing to lose a free feature and pay to get it back.

 

[aykay55]

Only Nintendo puppets would defend having something free taken away and sold back to them.

Players who play Mario kart 8 on switch are going to sign in after September and be surprised by a feature essentially being removed from their game, and that's a disgrace

Well when you bought the system you were definitely warned that online would be free until NSO releases, so you can't get mad at them for taking away free online, when they told you they would. And they're not taking the something free and adding a price tag, they're adding several new features like voice chat, cloud saves, and access to 20+ games with online multiplayer, that's a lot more than just online play.

 

[stanleyopar2000]

Virtual Console that you never own that requires subscription?

Abysmal voice chat requiring a smartphone?

A needless shooin feeling for being paid because Sony and Microsoft are doing it?

Hard. Fucking. Pass.

I would be less salty if Nintendo had a better replacement for Virtual Console instead of a subscription fee being the only option. Removing the ability to buy and owning VC outright just feels vindictive and spiteful to force NSO. We all know Nintendo is years behind the competitors and will do little to nothing about network issues. Also the backup save option being paid only is unacceptable.

The switch is more than capable of playing VC emulation offline. This is just an attempt to milk decade old titles and permanently modify the precedent of no longer owning virtual console games. (Which is why until now they've been horning after ROM sites hard lately) We demand a true virtual console experience and if we have to hack your console to do it damnit we will.

 

[Hanafuda]

Still disappointed to have to pay them (I have xbox1) but as bad as paying for online is, it's more warranted on those systems because there is 30x the choice of multiplayer games to play and they give away good games that actually count each month at least Xbox does.

It's "the players" fault for letting Sony charge for online without putting up a fight, PS3 was free and PS4 should of stayed that way.

Only Nintendo puppets would defend having something free taken away and sold back to them.

Players who play Mario kart 8 on switch are going to sign in after September and be surprised by a feature essentially being removed from their game, and that's a disgrace

Well I'm not here to defend Nintendo, I just find it interesting that Sony and Microsoft seem to get a pass for their subscription online. They offer more multiplayer games, but there aren't many I'd want to play (irrelevant to all but me), so I don't see a huge diff there. Those systems have had longer to develop a catalog, too. And, MS and Sony online services cost considerably more than Nintendo's will, so it's only reasonable there'd be more offered.

I also think it's interesting that it's 'the players' fault for letting Sony charge for online, but it's Nintendo that's wrong for doing it on their system, and the 'puppets' too.

It's not that I like Nintendo going to paid online, I just don't see why they shouldn't considering their competitors did and everyone went along with it. It's just a question of whether it's worth the $20 a year to you, same as the choice you have to make when buying a console or game in the first place. This wasn't something Nintendo pulled out of their ass as a surprise after everyone bought the Switch - it was announced this was coming when the Switch launched.

 

[MarkDarkness]

Learn what?

Crackers will bust their system no matter what. Removing a BASIC right like owning your own save files because that is a potential attack vector is unconceivable. This was implemented in the 3DS and taken away in the Switch. It is pretty much the reason why I hacked my system. Now I am a "pirate" risking being banned because I demand my right to own the progress in my games and back them up. Seriously, love Nintendo, but at the same time, they suck.

 

[Wrathcaster]

Pay to play online and get some free online Nes games....or....use my sx pro and enjoy any game I want offline.....hmm. Unless I hit my head really hard I will be sticking to offline with all my games.

 

[|<roni&g]

Well when you bought the system you were definitely warned that online would be free until NSO releases, so you can't get mad at them for taking away free online, when they told you they would. And they're not taking the something free and adding a price tag, they're adding several new features like voice chat, cloud saves, and access to 20+ games with online multiplayer, that's a lot more than just online play.

Voice chat is worthless these days, hardly anyone uses it anymore compared to 360 and PS3 days (PS3 had free online with voice chat). Nes games even with online play are worth little to nothing.
I don't even own the switch yet, there aren't enough new games to justify it, I have everything I'm remotely interested in on WiiU. It's all ports of old games so far, nothing new and essential. If they go through with paid online I'll likely never own one unless a popular custom server is made

 

[LWGShane]

It's not like it's $50/month.

No one charges $50 per month.

 

[LWGShane]

I pity those who say that can afford a $300 console but not spend the equivalent of $1.67 every month to play online.

The problem is that Nintendo is offering NES games that we've bought numerous times before and the cloud saves feature only works with "compatible games". (Seriously, why even pay for online if cloud saves aren't system-wide? I also fear you won't be able to backup game saves from online games like how you couldn't on Wii.)

Maybe you should realize that having online servers that won't run like garbage and neutralizing cheaters cost money.

What servers? Nintendo's online multiplayer is peer-to-peer. Nintendo may implement some sort of anti-cheat but this is Nintendo we're talking about. Switch is their fourth chance (Wii, 3DS, Wii U) to add anti-cheat and they haven't yet.

 

[PrincessLillie]

No one charges $50 per month.

Yes, but you get the point I was trying to make.

 

[aykay55]

Voice chat is worthless these days, hardly anyone uses it anymore compared to 360 and PS3 days (PS3 had free online with voice chat). Nes games even with online play are worth little to nothing.
I don't even own the switch yet, there aren't enough new games to justify it, I have everything I'm remotely interested in on WiiU. It's all ports of old games so far, nothing new and essential. If they go through with paid online I'll likely never own one unless a popular custom server is made

I beg to differ on your voice chat stance. As of now, voice chat is very much a necessity in the gaming world. And because you don't own the Sswitch yet, I don't think you have a very clear idea of just how many games are actually out for the system, because there are a lot. IN a matter of days the Switch will be getting State of Mind, a new release which is considered the "Detroit: Become Human" equivalent for PC, Xbox and Switch. Doom Eternal Switch was just announced and will be releasing the same day as everything else. The only reason the Switch is getting ports of older games is because it was released later this generation. Considering the fact that devs actually think using time, money and resources to get the game on Nintendo's hybrid is worth it says a lot about the system's success. Everything else you state in your post is simply opinion. Just because you don't like NES games doesn't mean the rest of us don't enjoy them, and many would consider online worth a lot. And if the Wii U is sufficent for your gaming needs, cool. But for the rest of us, it's not.

 

[stanleyopar2000]

They stopped offering save importing because of twilight and other hacks...

But it's causing people to hack their console out of spite.

Ironic.

 

[jt_1258]

That's because there's nothing constructive to say about it. It's garbage. We already have online play in Mario Kart but they will take it away to make it paid. No one cares for these legacy games! We have emulators. How many times can one person pay for ancient shit? Only so many times I can play these arcade style games. On PS4 at least it's new games (mostly).. not just Mario and Zelda and remasters. Switch gamers already had to pay $300 USD for a console with 32GB space and barely any games but the ones that are there, are more expensive than on the other consoles -_-

P.S. I have a Switch and PS4-Pro.. not just ranting for no reason.

I'm just going to chill and stack my collection and wait for The Last of Us 2 to come out. No more buying rehashed Nintendo games. Still.. I want to play Smash online but not sure if I'm willing to pay the $20 just for that one game (although it's not much of a cost) :l

tbh, the wii u re releases and heck, even old game virtual console releases aren't aimed at people like you. the wii u rereleaes more then anything as they are gettiing a breath of fresh air by being able to sell well on a decently selling console unlike there intial launches that didn't do as well. they are both ment for people who haven't played them before. they are also quick and easy to do which is why your seeing alot of them, we are nearing the end of major wii u titles by nintendo that will probably get this treatment so you don't have to worry about it much further, it was padding anyway to help fill out the switch library a little while they work on new games
the more expensive part I can't defend, that is simply devs pushing the extra cost of a cart onto the consumer rather than biting the bullet and just taking a lesser monitary gain from switch sales of the games they releas

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

well for me, i have used switch online 1 time since launch. i played 1 round of fortnite and that's it. if i don't use the free service, i don't see why i would pay for it.

same here, ya don't see me paying for psn...though that is a bit of a more expensive service

 

[SRKTiberious]

I pity those who say that can afford a $300 console but not spend the equivalent of $1.67 every month to play online.

Maybe you should realize that having online servers that won't run like garbage and neutralizing cheaters cost money. Everyone is doing it for at least double the price, so why are you being so harsh on Nintendo? If you ever owned a DS you'd know how much cheaters ruined online gameplay.

Oh look, the "you bought the console, so bend over and take it for a crap service" defense.

Here's the main problem. We've already seen what Nintendo's online offerings look like. They're garbage.

For some idiotic reason, Nintendo thinks that defaulting to WiFi makes for a fun gaming experience.

It doesn't.

WiFi may be perfectly fine for internet browsing, but thanks to the simple fact that packets can be dropped between the access point and the device, requiring them to be sent again, it causes way too much lag.

Anyone tried playing even 4-player smash online? Yeah, it's like that. Unless you're sitting within arm's reach of the router, you're going to get WiFi lag.

Also, the fact you need a phone to do basic stuff like voice chat when the console is clearly capable of it shows that Nintendo is being lazy. People don't like to reward laziness.

Are you complaining about getting free, online-enabled NES games? Would you rather want free Switch games? That would cost a lot more than $20 per year. And seeing how much garbage there's in the Switch library, it's safe to assume that you won't get to play any Splatoon.

I'm guessing you're the same kind of person who bought Super Mario Bros. on every platform since the Wii for $5 a pop. Except here, you're getting to rent it and maybe a few other ROMs from early in the NES's life (since you don't get to keep them if you let your service lapse) for $20 a year.

PSN and XBox Live may well be more expensive, but at least the games they offer you get to keep, and they're the same platform. they're not the same 30-year old games you've bought and rebought half a dozen times already.

As for me, yes, I will subscribe. Hell, maybe I'll even buy multiple years at once because of how cheap it is. I love online gaming and I hate cheaters.

Of course you will. You seem like the kind of whale that would happily drain's mommy and daddy's credit cards buying loot boxes and all the other predatory microtransactions mobile games can come up with if you could.

 

[Song of storms]

Of course you will. You seem like the kind of whale that would happily drain's mommy and daddy's credit cards buying loot boxes and all the other predatory microtransactions mobile games can come up with if you could.

Cry me a river, boy. I live alone.

 

[jt_1258]

Oh look, the "you bought the console, so bend over and take it for a crap service" defense.

Here's the main problem. We've already seen what Nintendo's online offerings look like. They're garbage.

For some idiotic reason, Nintendo thinks that defaulting to WiFi makes for a fun gaming experience.

It doesn't.

WiFi may be perfectly fine for internet browsing, but thanks to the simple fact that packets can be dropped between the access point and the device, requiring them to be sent again, it causes way too much lag.

Anyone tried playing even 4-player smash online? Yeah, it's like that. Unless you're sitting within arm's reach of the router, you're going to get WiFi lag.

Also, the fact you need a phone to do basic stuff like voice chat when the console is clearly capable of it shows that Nintendo is being lazy. People don't like to reward laziness.

I'm guessing you're the same kind of person who bought Super Mario Bros. on every platform since the Wii for $5 a pop. Except here, you're getting to rent it and maybe a few other ROMs from early in the NES's life (since you don't get to keep them if you let your service lapse) for $20 a year.

PSN and XBox Live may well be more expensive, but at least the games they offer you get to keep, and they're the same platform. they're not the same 30-year old games you've bought and rebought half a dozen times already.


Of course you will. You seem like the kind of whale that would happily drain's mommy and daddy's credit cards buying loot boxes and all the other predatory microtransactions mobile games can come up with if you could.

I've said it once and I'll say it again. It is the devs who have to implement on system voice chat, not nintendo holding there hands for it. nintendo is the only one who has pulled this dumb move of phone only voice chat, which mind you splatoon can actually do on system voice chat but only through a lan party. why they did this is anyones guess. now, the next game, I know not everyone is a fan of, but non the less is still making a little progress, this game is the only one that has bothered to try and implement voice chat and said game is fortnite. if it can do it then what is stoping other devs?

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

Oh look, the "you bought the console, so bend over and take it for a crap service" defense.

Here's the main problem. We've already seen what Nintendo's online offerings look like. They're garbage.

For some idiotic reason, Nintendo thinks that defaulting to WiFi makes for a fun gaming experience.

It doesn't.

WiFi may be perfectly fine for internet browsing, but thanks to the simple fact that packets can be dropped between the access point and the device, requiring them to be sent again, it causes way too much lag.

Anyone tried playing even 4-player smash online? Yeah, it's like that. Unless you're sitting within arm's reach of the router, you're going to get WiFi lag.

Also, the fact you need a phone to do basic stuff like voice chat when the console is clearly capable of it shows that Nintendo is being lazy. People don't like to reward laziness.

I'm guessing you're the same kind of person who bought Super Mario Bros. on every platform since the Wii for $5 a pop. Except here, you're getting to rent it and maybe a few other ROMs from early in the NES's life (since you don't get to keep them if you let your service lapse) for $20 a year.

PSN and XBox Live may well be more expensive, but at least the games they offer you get to keep, and they're the same platform. they're not the same 30-year old games you've bought and rebought half a dozen times already.


Of course you will. You seem like the kind of whale that would happily drain's mommy and daddy's credit cards buying loot boxes and all the other predatory microtransactions mobile games can come up with if you could.

also, sorry for double tagging you but I also need to take on the fact that you think you keep ps plus games and games with gold games, you don't, not unless you keep your subscription. here are each companys pages on this point
https://www.playstation.com/en-gb/g...our-playstation-plus-membership-is-cancelled/

Once your PlayStation Plus membership ends, content you previously downloaded at no cost as part of the membership (such as Plus Monthly Games) will no longer be available.

https://support.xbox.com/en-US/my-account/xbox-live-membership/games-with-gold-faq

On Xbox One, you’ll no longer be able to access your Games with Gold titles if you cancel your subscription. However, if you decide to renew your subscription at any time, you’ll be able to access and play your previously redeemed Games with Gold titles again.

 

[pedro702]

I've said it once and I'll say it again. It is the devs who have to implement on system voice chat, not nintendo holding there hands for it. nintendo is the only one who has pulled this dumb move of phone only voice chat, which mind you splatoon can actually do on system voice chat but only through a lan party. why they did this is anyones guess. now, the next game, I know not everyone is a fan of, but non the less is still making a little progress, this game is the only one that has bothered to try and implement voice chat and said game is fortnite. if it can do it then what is stoping other devs?

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------


also, sorry for double tagging you but I also need to take on the fact that you think you keep ps plus games and games with gold games, you don't, not unless you keep your subscription. here are each companys pages on this point
https://www.playstation.com/en-gb/g...our-playstation-plus-membership-is-cancelled/

https://support.xbox.com/en-US/my-account/xbox-live-membership/games-with-gold-faq

the major difference is nintendo doesn't have dedicated servers an while sony offers games sometimes even AAA games with less than 2 years its huge compared to 30+ years nes games...

 

[Elrod1980]

No, with SXOS retroNX and the lack of good online games I'm good with staying offline. No COD, No Battlefield, No Bluetooth headset, many missing sports games, No good shooters, I'll pass. Maybe they'll get it together by the time the Switch Pro launches. Until then a ban isn't that big of a deal.

 

[jt_1258]

No, with SXOS retroNX and the lack of good online games I'm good with staying offline. No COD, No Battlefield, No Bluetooth headset, many missing sports games, No good shooters, I'll pass. Maybe they'll get it together by the time the Switch Pro launches. Until then a ban isn't that big of a deal.

your not much of a fan of doom are you?