By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Wyrdness on 20 September 2018
Edit Thread
MrWayne said:
routsounmanman said:

So just because Microsoft is a giant corporation with the ability to bleed money and offer free services to you, Sony and especially Nintendo should do the same? 

Just to be clear, I am not defending Nintendo here, there should be a grace period of 1-6 months, but they don't have to give you anything for free. They are a company in it to make money, and they have no other business venue, other than video games. Basic concepts.

Look at my replies to spokenTruth, he had a similar point.

SpokenTruth said:

Let's go back  to where you started.  Free cloud saves without a paid subscription.  Sony doesn't offer this either so why are you calling Nintendo's online service trash for the very same thing that Sony does....or is it trash too?

Again, MS owns data centers all over the world NOT because of Xbox Live but because of their existing cloud services such as Azure (do you even know what Azure is?).  Nintendo is not going to invest billions into building up data centers all over the world just so you can have free cloud saves without a subscription.

keeping cloud saves behind a paywall is a bad service regardless of whether sony does it or nintendo. Why did you mention sony? Did you try to brand me as a sony fanboy?

Also, why are you still pretending that cloud save cost billions of dollars and only a huge company like Microsoft can do it for free? I've given you examples for companies that are as big or smaller than Nintendo and still offer cloud saves for free.

Your point against Valve was also weird, "Valve is damn near nothing but a service company anyway. And they get paid via advertising." What? Valves main business is the same as Nintendo's, selling games on their platform, they're even getting the same 30% share from 3rd party games.

Ultimately the reason why Nintendo keeps cloud saves behind a paywall doesn't even matter, it's a worse service compared to many of their competitors.

You don't seem to get what they're saying Sony and Nintendo would require to invest billions in order to offer cloud saving for free that's a massive investment for something that brings in no money. MS had the infrastructure up because they had servers from other aspects of their business already stretching back to all the way when they first had their own online mail service they've been making money off them from their other business exploits hence why they can dedicate a server or two to them with out charge, Valve are a service platform other companies pay a % on sales to be able to distribute their games on PC and manage maintenance the publishers selling their games on the platform are footing the bill. Publishers like Activision have advertisements and aggressive monetisation of their annual games paying things on their side.

Both Valve and MS had a business model that already involved using servers before hand while both Sony and Nintendo didn't which is why the latter two have to utilise partners to have servers so have to charge in order to pay for it.