By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Sales Discussion - Nintendo shot themselves in the foot with the Switch!

Jranation on 07 February 2017
Geralt said:

Nintendo always did decently because their console was in a lot of cases, peoples second console. However this may change with the switch.

We can agree most people who bought an xbox one didn't buy a ps4 and most people who bought a ps4 didnt buy an xbox one. This is the case 99% of the time because no one wants to pay TWO online subscriptions.

The number 1 thing the wii U had going for it was free online. People will purposely not buy this gens nintendo console because they know they wont pay for online.

PAID ONLINE IS A HUGE PROBLEM FOR THE SWITCH

First of all the quality of their online service will not be as good as xbox live or psn.

Second, nintendo becomes less attractive as a second console.

Third, the switch will not have enough third party games to justify paying 60 dollars a year for online. Games like splatoon 2 will be empty and inactive mark my words!

Forth you guys always talk about pokemon saving the switch. Pokemons largest userbase are 8-12 year olds. Do you think they are going to pay for online service to play pokemon? I dont think so!

i dont know what country you are living in..... but its not $60 in the US! Go do your research! 



Pocky Lover Boy! 

Around the Network
Jranation on 07 February 2017
Pemalite said:
jonathanalis said:

Also, is a 20 to 30$ subscription fee per year.

I don't think people have a concern with the price. $20-$30 is stuff all. Just like $100 a year is stuff all.

It's the principle of the matter.

I was always against paying for online with the Xbox, I was against it when Sony adopted a similar concept... And I am against it with Nintendo pushing the same thing... And I love the fact I don't have to pay a red cent on the PC.

You must have not seen people on VGCHARTZ hoping that the price is low. We all know that the content for the subscription will be the worse out of the 3. Sooooo that means that the price needs to be low. 



Pocky Lover Boy! 

Lawlight on 07 February 2017
superchunk said:
1. You know nothing of the Switch's online service to understand its value.
2. You ignore people who have netflix, hulu, amazon, cable, etc all at the same time.

People will pay for what they see has value. Nintendo has something MSony do not. 1st party games and a 30 year backlog of content.

Sony doesn't have first party? What am I reading?



vivster on 07 February 2017
Lawlight said:
superchunk said:
1. You know nothing of the Switch's online service to understand its value.
2. You ignore people who have netflix, hulu, amazon, cable, etc all at the same time.

People will pay for what they see has value. Nintendo has something MSony do not. 1st party games and a 30 year backlog of content.

Sony doesn't have first party? What am I reading?

From the context it's easy to see that he means 1st party Nintendo games. Please don't try to take offense just for offense's sake.



If you demand respect or gratitude for your volunteer work, you're doing volunteering wrong.

Zkuq on 07 February 2017
Geralt said:

We can agree most people who bought an xbox one didn't buy a ps4 and most people who bought a ps4 didnt buy an xbox one. This is the case 99% of the time because no one wants to pay TWO online subscriptions.

This is most likely an incorrect assumption. Well, both of them, really. What if I told you a lot of people own consoles without paying for subscriptions?



Around the Network
Rogerioandrade on 07 February 2017
Geralt said:

Forth you guys always talk about pokemon saving the switch. Pokemons largest userbase are 8-12 year olds. 

Nope. Its largest usebase is in the 19-25 year old range.

http://www.siliconera.com/2014/12/01/pokemons-audience-growing-older/

And... no, Switch is not a shot "in the foot" at all. Almost every online service is paid and Nintendo offer is really cheap compared to its competitors



Pemalite on 07 February 2017
Jranation said:
Pemalite said:

I don't think people have a concern with the price. $20-$30 is stuff all. Just like $100 a year is stuff all.

It's the principle of the matter.

I was always against paying for online with the Xbox, I was against it when Sony adopted a similar concept... And I am against it with Nintendo pushing the same thing... And I love the fact I don't have to pay a red cent on the PC.

You must have not seen people on VGCHARTZ hoping that the price is low. We all know that the content for the subscription will be the worse out of the 3. Sooooo that means that the price needs to be low. 

The console price -is- expensive.
The Xbox One during Boxing Day got down to $250 AUD, you could buy almost two Switch consoles for that.

But $30 is a drop in the bucket. It's the principle of the idea, Microsoft and Sony at-least make their pay-wall a usefull commodity by giving out free games every month, Microsoft even let's you keep two games permanantly.

On the PC however, there is no pay wall... And there is an endless supply of Free Games. So there is that.



--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--

Wyrdness on 07 February 2017

You think people bought the Wii U for free online? ROFL.



Lawlight on 07 February 2017
vivster said:
Lawlight said:

Sony doesn't have first party? What am I reading?

From the context it's easy to see that he means 1st party Nintendo games. Please don't try to take offense just for offense's sake.

Uh, no. That's not what he said. He said first party in general.



vivster on 07 February 2017
Lawlight said:
vivster said:

From the context it's easy to see that he means 1st party Nintendo games. Please don't try to take offense just for offense's sake.

Uh, no. That's not what he said. He said first party in general.

No. He said "first party", not "first party in general". That's why god created context, so that clever people can use it to understand texts how they were meant.



If you demand respect or gratitude for your volunteer work, you're doing volunteering wrong.