Topic: Let's talk about Nintendo Switch's online service...

[Soren]

My problem with the smartphone app route is that it becomes impossible to output party chat and game audio to the same headset. And I'm the kind of person who needs to hear everything from the same source. This is classic Nintendo creating a solution for a problem no one had.

[nickmitch]

It just seems like Nintendo couldn't get party chat to work on the console across titles, so they went with this route.  I'm really not sure what the benefits are to this.

[Stogi]

The benefits to this are that you can voice chat when you don't have a wifi connection. But that means you're also (probably) not playing online.

It's pretty dumb.

[lolmonade]

In my fantasy scenario, the separate app thing could be a great way to integrate these features, IF you could tether your Switch to your Phone's internet for "play anywhere" online.  It falls apart if you live in the US or anywhere that cell providers would ruin your data cap.


Either way, here in the real world, it's inelegant and makes me think they just couldn't figure out how to have it integrated into the console itself.


My personal use case for switch online?  Most of my real world friends play PS4 or PC, and won't have a Switch, so i'd be paying a monthly subscription for random matchmaking for Splatoon/Mariokart/Smash Bros, and the 1 Virtual Console Rental period/month.  Hard to swallow unless it's half the cost of Sony/Microsoft's services.

[nickmitch]

The benefits to this are that you can voice chat when you don't have a wifi connection. But that means you're also (probably) not playing online.

It's pretty dumb.

So, no benefits then?

[Stratos]

Aha! A use for my unlimited tethering!... though I would give that up just to have it all integrated on the console.

[KeyBilly]

Either way, here in the real world, it's inelegant and makes me think they just couldn't figure out how to have it integrated into the console itself.

Yep.  On the bright side, they do have a free period to convince us if they have actually created a good online system with enough content to pay for.  The main people paying for it might be hardcore Splatoon players.

[Stogi]

I know we've all said it, but seriously. They'd sell Switches faster than brazilian tit jobs if they set up a Netflix-like service. $15-20/month for unlimited access to games that are retroactively fit to play online/LAN and Switches sell more than the PS4 and XBONE combined.

[Spak-Spang]

Stogi:  Nintendo may not want to offer such a big price for such a small price.  how about 1 Console $10.00  your choice and then have an every console available option for $49.99 a month.  Including NES, SNES, Gamecube, Nintendo 64, Genesis, and such.

[lolmonade]

I know we've all said it, but seriously. They'd sell Switches faster than brazilian tit jobs if they set up a Netflix-like service. $15-20/month for unlimited access to games that are retroactively fit to play online/LAN and Switches sell more than the PS4 and XBONE combined.

Anecdotally, I would never buy-into such a system for more than $5/month, and even then I'd be struggling to justify it.  I've come to appreciate PS+'s method of having 3-5 free games for that month.  It puts a spotlight on games I may have not considered or had interest in and didn't get around to yet.  If Nintendo did a buffet-style sub service, I have 0 confidence the prices would be reasonable, 0 confidence Nintendo would continue adding games to make it a compelling service, and know I personally would end up defaulting back to the games I know I like rather than trying out new things.


This all comes with an assumption that Nintendo's going to open the floodgates of Virtual Console for Switch, which past has indicated they're plenty happy to have it be a trickle so each game "gets its time".

[Evan_B]

With the lack of analog triggers on the JoyCon, I unfortunately don't see GCN games coming to VC. What I would be interested in seeing is financial information regarding the "slow trickle" method- does it really net them sizable enough profits?

VC has been around for a while, and people are going to want to transfer up digital purchases- seeing that digital transfers are the last bastion of backwards compatibility in the video game industry, Nintendo has to play it right in order to get people to even continue investing in the service. Here's what I recommend- if Nintendo continued their slow trickle bullshit and have their also bullshit "mandatory upgrade price" like with Wii U, their online subscription service should allow users to waive that fee if attempting to update a previously owned VC game. In theory, it sounds nice, but I don't know how they would stop people from just subscribing for one month and updating all their old purchases- but on the other hand, it's 99 cents an Upgrade on Wii U (and 2 bucks for N64, I think?) so if the service was around 15 dollars WHICH IT SHOULD BE, YOU GREEDY ASSHATS, people would essentially be waiving the price for around 7-15 VC games. If you factor in the idea that people will likely continue to re-up month after month to play online games, it sort of evens out.

[nickmitch]

I know we've all said it, but seriously. They'd sell Switches faster than brazilian tit jobs if they set up a Netflix-like service. $15-20/month for unlimited access to games that are retroactively fit to play online/LAN and Switches sell more than the PS4 and XBONE combined.

This seems to presume that Nintendo has the SNES/NES games with the online upgrades already set to go.  I feel like Nintendo probably has like 6 ready and is making more as they go.

[Stratos]

With the lack of analog triggers on the JoyCon, I unfortunately don't see GCN games coming to VC.

Remember the images of Gamecube joycons? They could release those to allow you to play advanced VC games.

[Evan_B]

Oh yay! 80 bucks to buy VC games to play? Sign me up!

[Soren]

With the lack of analog triggers on the JoyCon, I unfortunately don't see GCN games coming to VC.

Remember the images of Gamecube joycons? They could release those to allow you to play advanced VC games.

HELL NO!

[KeyBilly]

It would only be acceptable if they include a 3DS cartridge slot.

[pokepal148]

We both know they're gonna do another GameCube adapter at some point so they'll probably just use that for GC VC

but why not both?

[Evan_B]

BATON DOWN THE HATCHES, LADS, WE'VE GOT OURSELVES A PRICE "CONFIRMATION":
http://nintendoeverything.com/kimishima-says-switch-online-service-will-be-2-3000-yen-yearly-looking-into-vr-for-switch/

So that's 2-3000 yen a year, which for us North American folks is anywhere between $17.50 to $26.50. How does this color your opinion of the service? Will you consider using it? Will you burn down Nintendo of America's headquarters? Will you sacrifice the blood of the innocents?

[nickmitch]

That's pretty reasonable.  If they keep it to $20/year then I wouldn't have too much of a problem with paying it.

[Kairon]

To be safe, I'm treating this as a suggestion that we'll be seeing a $30 price.

In fact, if you simply compare price ratios of the services in Japan, then this suggests a $40 USD price annually since I think Playstation Plus is much cheaper in Japan compared to the US.

[Evan_B]

Shhhh let us bask in the warm glow of potentially low online services while we don't have confirmation otherwise.

[Mop it up]

Yeah, it's probably gonna be higher in the US. I'd still rather have a free option with less features.

[Oedo]

On one hand, I do agree that the safe bet (so far) has usually been on Switch-related products being priced higher than expected. However, one thing to keep in mind about the Sony comparison is that they're the dominant platform in the west and not nearly as strong in Japan. They might feel like they have to price their online service that low in Japan to make their platforms more attractive, while they can get away with pricing it higher in North America because they're a the dominant platform this market. Nintendo doesn't have that luxury. Unless Nintendo has held back on some announcements that significantly increase the value proposition of their online service, I can't see them being successful at anything more than $30.