Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Ok, I know he doesn't but man I thought Games Workshop under Kirby's regime made some bone headed decisions, but wow, what Nintendo just did with The Switch it seems he is making decisions there now. You mean there are really people worse than Kirby running a company?

Pretty much one for the OT forum or possibly Geek Media.

 Alex Kolodotschko wrote:
Pretty much one for the OT forum or possibly Geek Media.

Or nowhere. It doesn't seem to have a point to it...

Didn't know we had one Alex. Thank you for that, will keep that in mind now.

The point GA? There is none but that we always said that Kirby was the worst CEO ever, and we actually have people who are worse and make even more worse or bone headed decisions. I guess we are lucky we got Kevin Roundtree instead of someone actually worse than Kirby. Or maybe count our lucky stars we didn't have anyone worse than Kirby during his regime because obviously he is not the worst at his job at all.

What is 'The Switch' and what has anyone done to it?

Look up Konami; Kirby looks like a sane businessman next to them

GW was certainly bad, but I could think of a dozen companies that have done a lot worse. At least they treated you with a degree of respect when it comes to customer service.

 Alex Kolodotschko wrote:
What is 'The Switch' and what has anyone done to it?

It's a new games console by Nintendo. Unfortunately that's all I know about it - Nintendo became irrelevant in my life a long time ago. In fact, I'm surprised they're still in business after the colossal failure that was the WiiU

Oh, if this is a discussion about insane businessmen then I'll just Godwin right now.
TRUMP

Wow, he has an arrogance rating of 100! What a card!

Wait, what about the Switch? What did they do? How do they have a bad CEO?

I have a lot of questions!

Moved to the correct forum.

And I believe we're discussing Nintendo's decision to make online gaming a "pay for it" experience, like XBox and Playstation currently do.

Wouldn't this go in VIDEO GAMES though, if really anywhere?

 Lorek wrote:
Moved to the correct forum.

And I believe we're discussing Nintendo's decision to make online gaming a "pay for it" experience, like XBox and Playstation currently do.

Ah, OP should stated that. I'm guessing he meant this: http://www.theverge.com/2017/1/13/14261018/nintendo-switch-paid-online-subscription-service-membership

Also, I don't think it's that dumb. Assuming it provides a couple good games and is decently priced, could be a fine move for them. The big thing is will it turn off the Wii/Wii-U crowd who already have a lot of the old games via the Nintendo shop.

vs.



???

Kirby you annoying little

I never liked the idea of paying for the right to play multiplayer games. Don't bother adding a feature to a game if I'm gonna have to pay extra to be able to access it - I'd rather that development time goes into something that I don't have to pay a monthly/annual fee for.

I'd rather pay for service than the other 3/4 of a game I just brought though.

 jreilly89 wrote:
Also, I don't think it's that dumb. Assuming it provides a couple good games and is decently priced, could be a fine move for them. The big thing is will it turn off the Wii/Wii-U crowd who already have a lot of the old games via the Nintendo shop.

Bear in mind that when they say you get one a month, you get it just for that month; if you want it after that then you need to buy it. http://www.polygon.com/2017/1/13/14266290/nintendo-switch-monthly-games-not-free

Considering that Playstation and Xbox actively give away games, this feels a lot like a "gotcha" trick incentive to pay for the subscription with the expectation of a free game.

 n0t_u wrote:
I'd rather pay for service than the other 3/4 of a game I just brought though.

If a multiplayer only experience is your preference most of the time, surely you find it ludicrous that you can't play the game you've bought till you pay a monthly/annual subscription to do so?

I'm hoping the system has built in Wireless as one has to pay extra to get a separate Ethernet connector so it would seem a bit odd to have to buy any internet connectivity at all.

There aren't to many Nintendo games that I want that need multiplayer (Zelda, Mario, DQ Heroes) so I don't think I'll get their version of Live Gold/PSN+.

Wait Nintendo expects us to PAY to use their online multiplayer services.

Yikes, I'd rather pay for dial up .


But seriously though Nintendo is known for having a horrible multiplayer experience of the internet as it is given their servers are almost always slow and laggy. Adding a subscription fee on top of that - even with additional shinnies - is not the way to go.

Unless they plan to improve their servers to not be terrible, then I'll look at them the same way I do Microsoft and Sony with XBox Live (or whatever it's called now) and PS+: it exists, I may not like it but it is the trend.

New Zelda Look incredible. All i care about at this Point

 Avatar 720 wrote:

 jreilly89 wrote:
Also, I don't think it's that dumb. Assuming it provides a couple good games and is decently priced, could be a fine move for them. The big thing is will it turn off the Wii/Wii-U crowd who already have a lot of the old games via the Nintendo shop.

Bear in mind that when they say you get one a month, you get it just for that month; if you want it after that then you need to buy it. http://www.polygon.com/2017/1/13/14266290/nintendo-switch-monthly-games-not-free

Considering that Playstation and Xbox actively give away games, this feels a lot like a "gotcha" trick incentive to pay for the subscription with the expectation of a free game.

I just wonder how popular a subscription for a Nintendo system will be. Nintendo is usually more geared to casual gamers, and kids. Xbox and Playstation have hardcore gamers that are older and have their own money to spend.

 General Annoyance wrote:

 n0t_u wrote:
I'd rather pay for service than the other 3/4 of a game I just brought though.

If a multiplayer only experience is your preference most of the time, surely you find it ludicrous that you can't play the game you've bought till you pay a monthly/annual subscription to do so?

Used to be (and still is for some) standard practice for MMOs and nobody kicked up a fuss. Not to mention Sony and Microsoft have been doing it successfully for years.

As for Nintendo, did anyone even use the free service? Everyone I know who tried it never touched it again due to being gak.

Jimquisition always has "nice" things to say about Nintendo (and Konami )



I rest my case

Unless any new news has come out, i think we'll have to wait as their approach to games could have changed and with more developers on board now we just don't what it'll be like.

Also take PS3 PSN and how bad that was and that was free.

I'm less concerned that Nintendo is trying to do a Live Gold/PSN+ than the fact they haven't got a track record of decent enough online service to make the thing worthwhile. Also, most of those services are more than multiplayer, but that is the meat and potatoes. Nintendo doesn't even have voice chat (supposedly atm) and messaging with others in a game will be through an app on your phone if the game supports it. Meh. Internet isn't new and having a nice robust infrastructure shouldn't be this difficult to pull off when you have examples and time.

 Avatar 720 wrote:

 jreilly89 wrote:
Also, I don't think it's that dumb. Assuming it provides a couple good games and is decently priced, could be a fine move for them. The big thing is will it turn off the Wii/Wii-U crowd who already have a lot of the old games via the Nintendo shop.

Bear in mind that when they say you get one a month, you get it just for that month; if you want it after that then you need to buy it. http://www.polygon.com/2017/1/13/14266290/nintendo-switch-monthly-games-not-free

Considering that Playstation and Xbox actively give away games, this feels a lot like a "gotcha" trick incentive to pay for the subscription with the expectation of a free game.

Yeesh. Yeah, that definitely skews my opinion. My mistake, I was under the assumption you get it for free permanently, not just for the month.