superchunk said: Lonely_Dolphin said: Source? Historical evidence and logical conclusion. 1. VC on two separate consoles (wiiu reduced but still covered NES/SNES heavily) 2. Classic Consoles (NES/SNES) The current solution uses the same software as from the Classic Consoles.

Nope that's not a source that allows you to say it's a fact. Also there's plenty reason to believe it wont happen I think.

-SNES games were originally part of the plan but were silently removed.
-The service is specifically called Nintendo Entertainment System.
-A rate of 3 NES games per month means they can keep adding new ones for the entirety of Switch's life.
-Nintendo hasn't said anything about including other systems.

RaptorChrist said: Offloading the voice chat functionality to our mobile devices frees up additional processing power on the Switch to allow for slightly better performance in our games. Personally, I almost never use voice chat, but I think Nintendo made a smart move with this one.

Voice chat isn't demanding.
The Xbox 360 could do it within an Operating System that was only using 32MB of Ram verses the Switch's 1024MB.
The Xbox 360 could do it with a CPU that was significantly inferior. (And didn't have an entire CPU core dedicated to OS/Background tasks.)

There really is no technical excuse why the Switch cannot have voice chat.

RaptorChrist said: Personally, I almost never use voice chat, but I think Nintendo made a smart move with this one.

....

What?

TruckOSaurus said: I just want to be able to send messages to my friends... why is that so hard Nintendo?

Amen. That this is missing annoys me to no end.

Lonely_Dolphin said: superchunk said: Historical evidence and logical conclusion. 1. VC on two separate consoles (wiiu reduced but still covered NES/SNES heavily) 2. Classic Consoles (NES/SNES) The current solution uses the same software as from the Classic Consoles. Nope that's not a source that allows you to say it's a fact. Also there's plenty reason to believe it wont happen I think. -SNES games were originally part of the plan but were silently removed. -The service is specifically called Nintendo Entertainment System. -A rate of 3 NES games per month means they can keep adding new ones for the entirety of Switch's life. -Nintendo hasn't said anything about including other systems.

I don't think anyone is saying its a fact but a likely possibility.

- The service itself was delayed by more than a year. This delay could also have caused a focus on NES only games withe SNES support coming later.
- The service as a NES app. There is no reason to think they won't add an app for any other console.
- This doesn't mean they can't add more or less or include an entirely different console. VC was much the same way, especially on WiiU.
- Why would they if they are not ready to deliver?

Pemalite said: RaptorChrist said: Offloading the voice chat functionality to our mobile devices frees up additional processing power on the Switch to allow for slightly better performance in our games. Personally, I almost never use voice chat, but I think Nintendo made a smart move with this one. Voice chat isn't demanding. The Xbox 360 could do it within an Operating System that was only using 32MB of Ram verses the Switch's 1024MB. The Xbox 360 could do it with a CPU that was significantly inferior. (And didn't have an entire CPU core dedicated to OS/Background tasks.) There really is no technical excuse why the Switch cannot have voice chat.

It is arguable that the Switch is running a more demanding operating system in general than X360. But regardless, you're right there is no technical excuse we know of. There is a use case scenario that Nintendo is focusing on that is more than likely driving this solution (with an app) over an integrated solution (within console). I think Nintendo is betting that consumers would rather just use their phones for all social mechanisms that any solution they'd create in the Switch. You could argue the phone app is a in-house solution, but I think basing it on the customer's phone is the key. It allows you to also use any other social app instead of or potentially, in combination of their app with any form of head wear you prefer (also alleviating the need to support a bunch of other tech).

I'm still in the general camp that an integrated solution would have been the better customer experience, but I'd like to see if Nintendo has some other new features coming that will make this solution more beneficial. Specifically, the game specific types of functionality the standalone app can provide by separating the needs of the game from the needs of the online / community functionality.

I don't play much online on any of my consoles (PS4, Xbone, PC, Switch) but from what I played of the Switch online, I don't notice much of a difference. I mean, I can see why someone might not like using their phones, but everyone already HAS a phone so it saves money on added accessories so I get it.

The online clarity was perfect (No different than my XBL and PSN experiences), the performance was at a 4/5 (Again, same as my PSN and XBL experiences), and the price was great in comparison.

sure, the free games you get on XBL and PSN are better, but you also pay a much, much higher fee for those. I'd say, in terms of performance and features when compared to price, Nintendo Switch online is the best deal! It's on par, performance wise, with its competition at a fraction of the price. Could it be better? yeah, it could. Would I be willing to pay more? Yes, I would. Did I take advantage of the family plan and end up paying a paltry 6.25 CAD a year? yes, I did.

Not only is this TOTALLY worth it, but I'd have happily paid the 24.99 a year for a solo option if I needed to. I just know that my team enjoys this.

Having spent a dozen hours or so on Mariokart and Super mario Bros. 3 since Tuesday, I can say I'm not only happy with the performance but impressed! Nintendo has done a good job, and I don't think it's fair to whine about 'but it used to be free' because, well, this shit costs money. Pay money, you cheapasses. If you are a mature, responsible adult, you should be willing to pay for the things you use. Videogames are a luxury, not an essential resource. If you can't afford to pay for online, then maybe you should be focusing on, I dunno, feeding yourself or paying your heat bill. If you have a switch and online play is important, bloody well pay for it.

superchunk said: Lonely_Dolphin said: Nope that's not a source that allows you to say it's a fact. Also there's plenty reason to believe it wont happen I think. -SNES games were originally part of the plan but were silently removed. -The service is specifically called Nintendo Entertainment System. -A rate of 3 NES games per month means they can keep adding new ones for the entirety of Switch's life. -Nintendo hasn't said anything about including other systems. I don't think anyone is saying its a fact but a likely possibility. - The service itself was delayed by more than a year. This delay could also have caused a focus on NES only games withe SNES support coming later. - The service as a NES app. There is no reason to think they won't add an app for any other console. - This doesn't mean they can't add more or less or include an entirely different console. VC was much the same way, especially on WiiU. - Why would they if they are not ready to deliver?

OP said this: "And yes, you'll get your SNES games in the future too. " Not maybe might or likely, but will.

-Not seeing why the delay caused them to pretend they never said SNES.
-I could just as easily say there's no reason to think they will, but I recognize there's reasons for both sides.
-True, but it does mean they don't need to.
-So people will be more inclined to buy in. They already did that with the whole online anyway. I'd certainly feel way better if I knew SNES, N64, and GCN games were coming.

RolStoppable said: Lonely_Dolphin said: -A rate of 3 NES games per month means they can keep adding new ones for the entirety of Switch's life. I think it's the eShop page for the NES application that states that eventually there will be no more NES games added. Doubtful that it refers to the end of Switch's lifecycle. Also doubtful that every kind of bad NES game is going to be added to the mix, so that limits the number of potential choices.

But they already have some bad ones a.k.a. all of them.

But okay, majority of Switch's remaining life then. Did virtual console keep adding games up until the very end of it's systems? Even if so, I believe they could go a good 3 years of NES games, which will end up with over a hundred titles in the service. I think that justifys not adding more games all the way until Switch 2.

superchunk said: It is arguable that the Switch is running a more demanding operating system in general than X360. But regardless, you're right there is no technical excuse we know of.

Of course it is running a more demanding OS.
But even though that is the case, there is still zero technical reason to omit voice, it is just not demanding on system resources.

superchunk said: There is a use case scenario that Nintendo is focusing on that is more than likely driving this solution (with an app) over an integrated solution (within console). I think Nintendo is betting that consumers would rather just use their phones for all social mechanisms that any solution they'd create in the Switch. You could argue the phone app is a in-house solution, but I think basing it on the customer's phone is the key. It allows you to also use any other social app instead of or potentially, in combination of their app with any form of head wear you prefer (also alleviating the need to support a bunch of other tech).

Well... Nintendo is wrong, it's a hot cumbersome mess.
Who wants  to be fumbling around with phones while playing a game? Since when did we have 4 hands?

superchunk said: I'm still in the general camp that an integrated solution would have been the better customer experience, but I'd like to see if Nintendo has some other new features coming that will make this solution more beneficial.

I agree.

superchunk said: Specifically, the game specific types of functionality the standalone app can provide by separating the needs of the game from the needs of the online / community functionality.

I don't see how a standalone app running on a smartphone could possibly provide any benefits over an integrated solution, nor has anyone provided a compelling argument on why that is the case yet.
Voice communication has been a "thing" for over a century now, it's not a difficult concept.

Would have loved LTE support as well, but that is another discussion/whinge to be had.