Nintendo Switch

[NickC]

4 minutes ago, PyramidFace said:

The amounts of money involved are so negligible that it's hard to imagine getting worked up over it.

 

When you check out the slick online gaming setup Nintendo are planning, £18 a year is a bargain. 

 

I'd pay a few hundred quid to get my hands on the kit.

 

Man I can't wait to break out this beauty!

 

[Stanley]

Just now, Bojangle said:

You actually can play it without PS+. On Xbox however you DO need a Gold account.

I didn't know that. I wonder why Sony allowed this?

[jonamok]

I'm fine with them charging for online play, and access to old, shit games - everyone makes that value judgement for themselves. Personally, I have zero fucking interest in either, and would elect not to pay for online until the offer improves - it's half(ish) the price of PSN, but, if you're being honest, a tiny fraction of the value. YMMV.

 

However, re. the save game back-ups, it's the principle that its only solution is paywalled (when no other console is) that pisses me off. Such that if there was an easy/safe way to hack my Switch to enable local back-ups, I would probably open that particular door - and who knows where that leads...

 

All Nintendo need to do is announce that the online saves bit is outside the pay wall. Easy, and consumer-friendly. Of course, if they did that they would likely sell a much smaller number of online passes.

[Simmy]

2 minutes ago, Stanley said:

Out of intetest what do people think they should charge for the service they've announced. Knowing you've got no choice what's the most you'd be willing to pay?

 

Honestly? Remove the NES games and charge nothing. People need inventive, and offering such a bare bones service isn't it.

[SozzlyJoe]

3 minutes ago, Stanley said:

It can't, you need PS+ otherwise you can't play online rendering the game useless.

 

OK, my bad. That's just Save the World? I read that when it officially goes F2P it will go free (as it is only Early Access now) but that's just too weird to discuss so I'll drop it.

[Simmy]

1 minute ago, NickC said:

 

When you check out the slick online gaming setup Nintendo are planning, £18 a year is a bargain. 

 

I'd pay a few hundred quid to get my hands on the kit.

 

Man I can't wait to break out this beauty!

 

 

Ugh I cringe just looking at that. Fucking hell

[Stanley]

Just now, Simmy said:

 

Honestly? Remove the NES games and charge nothing. People need inventive, and offering such a bare bones service isn't it.

That's not an option though is it. Obviously this is all hypothetical, like it or not it's £18 a year. I just wondered what people would pay if they're not willing to pay that.

[Simmy]

Just now, SozzlyJoe said:

 

OK, my bad. That's just Save the World. I read that when it officially goes F2P it will go free (as it is only Early Access now) but that's just too weird to discuss so I'll drop it.

 

Yeah I think most if not all F2P games on PS4 don't require ps+. Nintendo will follow suit there too surely.

[Nespresso]

Chat moving so fast no one will notice I don't even own a Switch!

[Stanley]

Just now, Simmy said:

 

Yeah I think most if not all F2P games on PS4 don't require ps+. Nintendo will follow suit there too surely.

I doubt it. If MS are charging then Nintendo will.

[NickC]

4 hours ago, Stanley said:

Out of intetest what do people think they should charge for the service they've announced. Knowing you've got no choice what's the most you'd be willing to pay?

 

£0 for cloud saves. That should be free. They do that, and a lot of this customer annoyance goes away.

 

£31 per year is for online gaming is OK IMO, even with their lame setup, but I really think they need to add more than some 30 year old games, even if they have been enhanced a bit. It seems pretty mean, a bit like they are laughing at their customers.

 

Please understand.

[Not Thread Owner]

4 minutes ago, Stanley said:

That's not an option though is it. Obviously this is all hypothetical, like it or not it's £18 a year. I just wondered what people would pay if they're not willing to pay that.

 

They did a survey a while back, asking exactly this. I think I said £20.

[Lovelyman]

 guys it's OK I'm going to keep posting here for a hundred pounds a post it's OK I said about it earlier. 

[Bojangle]

2 minutes ago, Stanley said:

I doubt it. If MS are charging then Nintendo will.

I think it's too tough to say right now, it seems they're letting the developer decide. Probably safe to say all first party titles moving forward will require it. Maybe F2P = No sub needed which would make sense and make the system more attractive to devs too.
 

Quote

Nintendo Switch games such Splatoon™ 2, ARMS™, Mario Kart™ 8 Deluxe, Mario Tennis™ Aces, and Sushi Striker™: The Way of Sushido, will require a Nintendo Switch Online membership, but other games will vary.

 

[Stanley]

Just now, Mrs Horribleman said:

 guys it's OK I'm going to keep posting here for a hundred pounds a post it's OK I said about it earlier. 

I'll read your single player posts

[Girth Certificate]

Quote

 Sushi Striker™: The Way of Sushido,

 

 

[Yuujiin]

1 hour ago, Stanley said:

It can't, you need PS+ otherwise you can't play online rendering the game useless.

You can I'm afraid ,my ps+ ran out 6months ago and can still play it. Perhaps that's why it's so popular on the system.

[Stanley]

Just now, Yuujiin said:

You can I'm afraid ,my ps+ ran out 6months ago and can still play it. Perhaps that's why it's so popular on the system.

Yeah I was wrong on that. I wish I knew because that's about the only game I play online on PS4. Mind you I enjoy the monthly games too so I'm not too bothered about paying.

 

Seems odd that you don't need it. Sony already have enough subscribers to support the game I would have thought, and it would be a good way of getting more.

[Yuujiin]

1 minute ago, Stanley said:

Yeah I was wrong on that. I wish I knew because that's about the only game I play online on PS4. Mind you I enjoy the monthly games too so I'm not too bothered about paying.

 

Seems odd that you don't need it. Sony already have enough subscribers to support the game I would have thought, and it would be a good way of getting more.

I was surprised as well I bet Sony are not to pleased all those subs they could have had.

 

E3 for Nintendo should be interesting if they announce games that have online play 

Waverace

Pilotwings

F Zero

And maybe Monster Hunter

 

Does anybody know what Retro are working on??

[Fletch]

I've never even played online on the Switch but I'll probably still get this just for the NES games, I'm probably in a minority on that one though.

[routeburn]

Raging Justice is out on eShop. Basically a Streets of Rage/Final Fight/Double Dragon homage. Ex-Rare dev from the UK.

 

Interview here:

 

 

Played a couple of hours last night. If you like side scrolling brawlers I would think a 7/10. Gameplay could be a bit deeper and polished. Not much variety in the level structure and environments. Assets reused quite a lot. However, a pretty solid example of the genre and good fun 2 player.

[Stanley]

7 minutes ago, Fletch said:

I've never even played online on the Switch but I'll probably still get this just for the NES games, I'm probably in a minority on that one though.

I'm looking forward to them too. Hopefully they'll be followed shortly after by GBA, SNES etc. 

[Bojangle]

3 minutes ago, Stanley said:

I'm looking forward to them too. Hopefully they'll be followed shortly after by GBA, SNES etc. 

There's only so many NES games they can add to the service before they start really scraping the barrel, I'd say (hope) the plan is to start adding SNES, GBA, N64 etc to the service moving forward.

[Fieldini]

It's notable that a lot of the members saying that £20 a year is a negligible amount to pay for an online service haven't been able to stretch to £5 a year to support the forum.

[Simmy]

5 minutes ago, Fieldini said:

It's notable that a lot of the members saying that £20 a year is a negligible amount to pay for an online service haven't been able to stretch to £5 a year to support the forum.

 

Rllmuk doesn't even have voice chat though

[cohen205]

Or cloud backups!!!

[Stanley]

5 minutes ago, Fieldini said:

It's notable that a lot of the members saying that £20 a year is a negligible amount to pay for an online service haven't been able to stretch to £5 a year to support the forum.

It's not mandatory though is it? 

[Bojangle]

6 minutes ago, Fieldini said:

It's notable that a lot of the members saying that £20 a year is a negligible amount to pay for an online service haven't been able to stretch to £5 a year to support the forum.

I don't see the value in it tbh.

[cohen205]

I love how all of us cheapskates get our excuses/sarcy comments in straight away 

[Stanley]

I'll be honest I don't even know how to pay £5 a year to support the forum.