Topic: Nintendo Switch --OT--

@YummyHappyPills I prefer if they did something like Game Pass, keep the online and monthly games separate. €5 for online and cloud saves, and €15 for the Nintendo Game Pass. It looks a lot more reasonable like that, and it's the same price!

@Octane I agree - that would be far more sensible. I am not interested in the current game offering, I would rather have had a VC but without much use for online, I am basically paying half the PS+ Sub, for cloud saves. Not saying that PS+ is the best thing ever, but I've already played three games this year making it pretty much worth it - not to mention discounts.

Nintendo are also pretty bad at discounts - £5 off a year old £50 game isn't much of a discount.

So basically, this is what they already offer for free (the online gameplay), but with access to some NES games and cloud saves on top. Bargain? 🤔

@YummyHappyPills Oh I don't doubt that by the time they get to N64 games the price will have magically doubled.

@NecuVise No it's not. If I want to play say Borderlands 2 online with my son on split screen I have to use guest account, I can't use my own unless I pay for gold on mine as well.

@Octane @Rudy_Manchego I am sure that we would want MS or Sony to offer 'tiers' for their 'online' subscription too. Split up the £40-50 annual charge to offer various aspects of the 'complete' service. A price for those that want online only, a price for those that want free games, a price for those that want store discounts and/or extra online storage/cloud saves. However we get 1 price that includes all services.

There has been many months were I have had NO interest in the free games and I never really take advantage of the extra savings from buying in their online store. I have never backed-up my game saves either on PS so for months, the only thing I was paying for was the ability to play any of my games to their fullest and in some games like Destiny, to actually play them at all. In recent month's, I admit that there has been a 'few' games I have added to my library - Deus Ex and Mad Max for example - although this month is not a good month for me as I have Rayman (thanks to Gold) on the XB1 and coincidentally added MGSv via PS+ so this month's XB1 offerings are not offering me anything I want. If you aren't interested in Online gaming but still want the games and to keep playing any games you downloaded, you still have to pay the full price.

I know that Nintendo's seems to offer a lot less - also for half the cost - and there is always going to be people that only want a 'part' of what the full subscription offers. Its like taking out a Sky Sports subscription when you only watch 1-2 football matches a week - no interest in F1, Cricket, Golf, Tennis or any other sport but you can't subscribe to just a part of the service.

@BAMozzy Honestly it's not unheard of of people wanting to pay for what they want rather then a package. With streaming channels that's the way cable channels are going. If I want I can purchase just HBO or Showtime or ESPN and not a whole cable subscription like in the past. Even services like Netflix have that I can pay for just stream, only discs, or both if I want. Alot of services are doing that now so I can see where people are coming from. This is just a case of Nintendo being beind as always.

@Tasuki This is just a case of the games industry being behind as always. Its not just Nintendo doing an all or nothing bundle sadly.

@Tasuki I'm afraid you're wrong.
https://support.xbox.com/en-US/xbox-one/xbox-live/xbox-live-g...

@Tasuki Its no different from Sony and MS with their subscription service too - you can't pay just for online or just for the games. I know some Subscriptions can tailor the package to an individual but there are still a lot that don't. I used Sky and you can opt for various levels of your package - I don't think they offer the option to pick just SkySports 'Football' channel or just Sky Cinemas 'Premiere' channel. If you only want say Sci-fi/horror movies, you also have to have all the other Sky Cinema channels whether you watch them or not. The alternative is to use on demand and just pay for the movies you want - often around £4 a time if you 'rent' which if you watch more than 1/2 movies a week costs more than the full subscription anyway.

Maybe they will move to a tiered system - before MS or Sony do...

@NecuVise Ok that might be something new with Xbox One cause with the Xbox 360 you couldn't unless I am missing something.

@BAMozzy The sports channel comparison seems to be more like wanting to pay online for a specific game. Monthly games, cloud saves and online play aren't really comparable I think. It feels as if they just took three unrelated features and locked them behind the same paywall. Imagine going to a supermarket and being forced to buy a pound of meat every time you wanted to buy a bag of apples

And yes, I know many other companies, even non-gaming, have similar strategies, but I just think that they could've made a difference.

@Octane We live in a world where Nintendo not screwing a game, product release or system is considered a miracle in the same vein as unicorn droppings, and them managing to only mostly screw it up is a blue moon event in frequency.

Dont expect them to push forward for the industry.

Unless its USB-C controllers with good battery life. At which point everybody else pay close attention

@Tasuki I don't know how it was back on Xbox 360 as I have never owned it, but this is the way it is on Xbox one.

@Octane It was just something that sprang to mind - the comparison of only wanting one aspect - whether its just the football with Sky or just the online gaming with these subscriptions - not everything that the subscription entitles you to have.

Nintendo could have done more - true. They could have offered a tiered service too where you pay for the 'bits' you want but at £18 a year - £1.50 a month essentially if you buy annually, its hardly bank breaking. It can get complicated too if you say buy a years subscription to a part (say online) but then add another part a few months later and another part a few months later with various different parts all on different time scales. Then you have differing prices - monthly, 3monthly and yearly prices for 'each' individual aspect - maybe even different tiers for different combinations of the '5' areas too like 1 package offering Online, data storage and NES online but not the dedicated app or exclusive offers for 'members'. How do you break it down - surely not each part is 30p a month (for a year) and maybe the cost is mostly just for Online, the App maintenance and NES online and because you subscribe, they can offer online storage and give you some offers for basically 'free' as a 'bonus' - certainly not literally costing 'money' a month as the offers are still profitable for Nintendo - just not as profitable as they are for non-subscriber purchases. The fact they are on 'sale' may actually sell more and therefore actually improve the profits of Nintendo that month.

@BAMozzy You are right - I tend to weigh up subscriptions based on what I get out of it, and I advise everyone to do the same. Like Amazon Prime - I use Amazon a lot, I use it on my kindle for free books/magazines, I use the photos storage and I watch the TV so for me, it makes sense. Same with PS Plus. I'm not that interested in online but I if I add that, plus the games (that for me, I do use - as I own a Vita, PS3, PSVR and PS4), as well as the digital discounts, it makes sense. That's why companies like Sony and Amazon bundle so much stuff - to try to give people reasons to subscribe.

For Nintendo though, the price point is relatively low but the offerings are also quite weak.

@Rudy_Manchego I guess that depends on what those offerings are giving to you. If you play a lot of Online for example, that £1.50 a month may be worth every penny. Maybe if all you want is some cloud saves, then it may seem a lot of money for very little. If there was only 1 show on Amazon you wanted to watch and only watch on your (1080p) TV's app, you may feel that paying the full subscription, especially as you never buy from Amazon either, and for UHD HDR, you may feel that the annual subscription charge is a LOT for very little - or very little that interests you. Its cheaper to buy the bluray box set of that show so you do have alternatives. The whole package adds up though to be 'great' value if you take advantage of everything it offers - even if you only take advantage of 'half' of what it offers, it can still be worthwhile and get your money's worth.

To me, it seems that a lot here aren't interested in online and only want cloud storage for example. If you only wanted that aspect with PS4, that would cost you more than double. People were complaining that the PS4 PS+ games were 'poor' and didn't have PS3/Vita, didn't buy games online and felt they were paying a LOT for online especially as that was free last gen on PS3. Those with just a PS3 may also feel they are paying a LOT (£50) for some 'mediocre' games they don't want and have to keep their subscriptions up to keep playing the various 'good' PS+ games they acquired years ago. Essentially getting nothing 'new' for their money but only paying to keep what they had accessible.

@NecuVise Yeah I don't have an Xbox One only a 360. I can play stuff like say CoD or Borderlands on my son's 360 with him but I have to use a guest profile if I go online with him which is just HISUSERNAME2 unless I buy for gold as well.

PES2019 is announced!

For everything but Switch!

I think we should now be at the point where this doesn't happen, yet here we are.

Crash has moved to June 29, same day as Ys VII and Wolfenstein 2, so RIP one of those games, and Monster Hunter Generations Ultimate comes August 28.

Finally.

If REmake 2 launches this year, Capcom is going to have one hell of a 2018.