Your Opinion on Paid Online

[DaisyFan]

i'm fine with it, as long it give good service and good price for it.

 

[Energyblade7]

i'm fine with it, as long it give good service and good price for it.

Well yeah, I think the majority of us here will pay regardless, but it may prevent new players from coming to Splatoon 2, especially since most of the game revolves a around multiplayer...

 

[DaisyFan]

I'm pretty sure they mention it gonna be free for during the first months of the console, it gonna give people enough time to find out if its worth it at all. its basically PS+ with old nintendo games.

 

[peat-warrior]

This is what I think about the paywall:

 

[Magic8Ball]

I'm just curious about this and in no way trying to attack people.

Of all the people who are upset about the paywall, how many of you have used PS+ or XBox Live?

 

[MacSmitty]

I'm just curious about this and in no way trying to attack people.

Of all the people who are upset about the paywall, how many of you have used PS+ or XBox Live?

I've have a PS4 and use PS+. I abused the system by getting a subscription during the holidays when the price was cut, and by the time the whole passes, I'll have enough money to pay for another subscription that has a price cut.

That being said, I hope they revamp the online pay system somewhat before time to pay for online becomes a thing in the fall.

 

[Ulk]

They don't need extra payment for online service. We pay for the online service as we pay for our consoles. Their every expense is included in the retail price, unless anybody here believes they paid the for "free" online servers out of their own pockets back in the Wii U days. People find Nintendo having a ****ty network service as an excuse for making it paid online, which is ridiculous and indicates the exact opposite. That's not any different than saying it's justified that we now pay a fee for the cleaning lady in the super market upon our purchases because she no longer sweeps only half the floors.

With that said, it's not justified and neither something I'm going to dignify with a purchase. People doing that is the only reason this trend still exists. However, Splatoon 2 is a real beauty. So if the price for the online services is low enough for me to to consider it worthwhile despite me having only two games that I'd like to play online, being SSB Switch and Splatoon 2, I would consider a purchase but also of course acknowledge myself as part of the problem.

 

[Dessgeega]

Well Ulk, you're still quite the extremist, I see. So you really think your 300 dollar purchase provided the funds for several years of your Splatoon and Smash matches? Your habit of blaming entire groups of people isn't endearing either.

Ask yourself, what is worse: paying 60$ for a game and monthly charges on top of that or 60$ with the addition of optional micro transactions? Both are garbage, but if I'm forced to pick one option it'd be the latter.

It's feels incredibly dumb to me because kids form the target audience to Splatoon, and if there's one thing i know about kids is that they don't have the money to pay up on a timely basis and especially not the methods to do so online. It's no doubt that this will take a big hit to the game's potential playerbase, and reminds me that Nintendo really has trouble adapting to modern times because they could've easily added a freemium system on top of it instead.

I actually thought Nintendo would rather come with a freemium option, like exclusive weapon, gears and skins up for purchase with irl cash to end up making profit to keep the servers running. Overwatch has those too more-or-less and they ended up making far more profit than the game itself had. But y'know, i guess that would make too much sense in a game that's all about fashion.

I get that their servers need money to run, but there's a so much easier alternative that is not only far more profitable but also allows everybody to play. You guys have no idea how much money adults are willing to blow on garbage loot boxes.

...It's depressing how companies have successfully normalized microtransactions in the minds of consumers. So Overwatch's system of being able to spend a hundred dollars on gambling and still not get the item you want is preferable to you in this scenario? Amazing. I'm not a fan of monthly charges either but at least you're guaranteed to GET something for that. Cosmetics aren't "harmless" either, before you bring up that tired argument, because even things that don't affect gameplay create a have/have not scenario that makes non-spending players jealous and enticed to spend their dosh. And Splatoon's fashion DOES affect gameplay, so this would be even worse. These are multi-million dollar companies. They don't need to wheedle even more money out of you, ESPECIALLY in the cases where it is virtual gambling. Regulation is going to come down hard on that sometime.

Also, as for kids not being able to pay up on a timely basis? GOOD. Kids are already some of the worst "whales" around, just look at all the news stories of kiddos dropping thousands of their parent's money on mobile games, they don't need the encouragement. Also, let's be frank, any parent that drops money on something as expensive as a game system for their kid is going to suck up the additional fee. Skylanders exists and is a massive success, and we all know that success was taken out of the wallets of adults :p

-How much does server upkeep cost? It can't cost too much if Nintendo has been keeping online play free up until now.

There will be plenty of people who can afford a $5 monthly / $60 a year payment, but that will turn off a portion of would be online gamers.
If the above were the case for Splatoon 2, I am concerned for our game's community size.

Several hundred thousand dollars a year. Google is your friend. As for turning people off, the game already does that by being on the Switch. Go look at player counts for online games, you'll always find the largest numbers on the free-to-play titles, because people will whinge about paying ANY amount but pounce on something they don't have to pay for. There's plenty of evidence over the last decade showing this.

Those rambling, needlessly grumpy responses aside, Nintendo tends to do things their own way. They make as many boneheaded mistakes as everybody else, but they usually (usually) aren't as transparently greedy as other companies. Also, keep in mind that this is an ONLINE service, and is subject to change at literally any moment. Microsoft was committed to their anti-used games software and then lo and behold, they patched it out of the system at release. I know people like to speculate, but there is very little to go on and what is there might not be in a month. Can we perhaps rein it in a little?

 

[chrisblass1]

Depends on the price, cant lie and say that im not disappointed tho

 

[Joasa]

I really think it greatly depends on what the money is going towards. Are they gonna use it to support fast, lag-free regional servers and E-Sports? Or is it just gonna go into their pockets because "they can". It really depends what this goes to. I don't mind paying an extra fee as long as they keep DLC free and if it means a better gameplay compared to its predecessor.

 

[Magic8Ball]

I really think it greatly depends on what the money is going towards. Are they gonna use it to support fast, lag-free regional servers and E-Sports? Or is it just gonna go into their pockets because "they can". It really depends what this goes to. I don't mind paying an extra fee as long as they keep DLC free and if it means a better gameplay compared to its predecessor.

You have to remember this is Nintendo we're talking about. It's not like they haven't calculated every possible way this might affect their games. If they think the risk is worth taking, they probably have a reward in mind for the betterment of the system.

I do think that they'll keep DLC free but hey we can only speculate.

 

[peat-warrior]

Those rambling, needlessly grumpy responses aside, Nintendo tends to do things their own way. They make as many boneheaded mistakes as everybody else, but they usually (usually) aren't as transparently greedy as other companies.

Trust me, as long we live in a capitalist world, Nintendo is just as greedy like any other company.

 

[Dual]

My opinion is that it sucks, and third party companies are probably going to take advantage of it.

 

[Magic8Ball]

Trust me, as long we live in a capitalist world, Nintendo is just as greedy like any other company.

Do you have any proof? You've trusted Nintendo with this much money before by buying systems and games right? This is no different. And if they want to get better and provide better services and games for us, then they're gonna need more money. Like you said, it's a capitalist world.

 

[Dessgeega]

Trust me, as long we live in a capitalist world, Nintendo is just as greedy like any other company.

When they start doing Ubisoft and EA-level tactics, for a couple examples, I'll be sure to agree. Augment Your Pre-Order, anyone?

 

[peat-warrior]

Do you have any proof? You've trusted Nintendo with this much money before by buying systems and games right? This is no different. And if they want to get better and provide better services and games for us, then they're gonna need more money. Like you said, it's a capitalist world.

They are a giant multimillion company like any other. They have to ripoff their customers and exploit their workers, that's the way how to make profit. And without gaining constant profit, a company isn't able to exist in competition.

 

[Dessgeega]

They are a giant multimillion company like any other. They have to ripoff their customers and exploit their workers, that's the way how to make profit. And without gaining constant profit, a company isn't able to exist in competition.

Oh, you mean in that regard. Well yeah. Anything deemed a corporation is a faceless legion that has the ultimate goal of becoming everything to everyone. Kinda thought that particular flavor of evil went without saying, because that's Earth for you :P

 

[Magic8Ball]

They are a giant multimillion company like any other. They have to ripoff their customers and exploit their workers, that's the way how to make profit. And without gaining constant profit, a company isn't able to exist in competition.

So you're saying that by making and selling tons of systems and games it's not going to keep them afloat? Just like with the Wii U, right? Also you're basing your arguement off of what OTHER companies have done. Do you know workers/employees/customers that have been ripped off by Nintendo? Because I certainly haven't. And besides, it's not like you're going to go bankrupt by paying 50$ a year for something, but it helps Nintendo a lot to keep themselves going. Please don't go basing one company off of others, that's not the way the world works.

 

[Ulk]

Well Ulk, you're still quite the extremist, I see. So you really think your 300 dollar purchase provided the funds for several years of your Splatoon and Smash matches? Your habit of blaming entire groups of people isn't endearing either.

I simply know how economics work. You call that extremist. I call that educated. Servers are fixed expenses, meaning they get covered by the the revenue per piece, multiplied by the predicted sales, minus the variable expenses. In other words it all depends on the sales output, which, going by the least successful console as an example (as Nintendo's predictions are traditionally pessimistic), would be at around 12m sold consoles within the entire life cycle. Companies like Apple and Samsung have around 30% production costs, rest pure profit - ads, distribution, you name it. Nintendo is not that extreme so let's not use that as a prime example. Just to show how little actual production costs can make up, though.
Can you still tell me that with a retail price of 300 and a predicted sales output of over 10 million they cannot cover their own service? Let me just remind you that Sony provided superior performances for "free", or rather no extra charge. If you actually believe they can't cover the server costs with that retail price, then I can't help you.

 

[peat-warrior]

Oh, you mean in that regard. Well yeah. Anything deemed a corporation is a faceless legion that has the ultimate goal of becoming everything to everyone. Kinda thought that particular flavor of evil went without saying, because that's Earth for you :p

This has nothing to do with "good" and "evil", it is just the truth about our economic system. And the scientific evidence has been found over 100 years ago, which is still correct.