Quantcast
Nintendo Would Like To Deliver Legacy Platform Games "in some form"

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Nintendo Would Like To Deliver Legacy Platform Games "in some form"

Barkley said:
DreadPirateRoberts said:

The people with hacked Switches represent a negligible share of Switch owners.  Also, to be blunt, the majority of those people were never going to pay for legacy games in the first place.  

That's not my point. My point is that people can get retro games running on every device under the sun, sometimes in a matter of days. It should be a doddle for Nintendo yet they don't do it. Neither did Sony with PS1 on PS4. I understand third party games would require contracts/agreements or whatever but their first party games should have been up ages ago.

Don't know what takes these companies so long.

Snes, GBA, GB, GBC and N64 games are all playable on the Switch with emulators, why can't Nintendo themselves do it?

Of course they *can* do it.  After all, they've done it before.  This isn't a technical question, but an economic one.  Nintendo is clearly of the mind that subscription is going to bring in more revenue than a la carte sales will.  We would all like to see them add games to the subscription service at a much faster rate, of course, but it's fairly obvious SNES titles are coming around the time year 2 renewals come up for NSO.



Around the Network

Meanwhile the Nvidia Shield TV, also running on a Tegra X1, has official 1080p Nintendo ports of Mario Galaxy, Twilight Princess, and Donkey Kong Country Returns... only in China.



Marth said:
You have to wait for the Nintendo Retro Postal service to go live in April 2020.


There you can order all your favorite games from Nintendos long history for only $29.99*

After 2-4 weeks of delivery time you will get your order that contains a code to download the game on your Nintendo Switch.
After first activation you can play the game for up to 10h of playtime or 2 weeks of real time.
So you will never get bored with old games and can try out the whole libary. The game will even uninstall by itself.

*Only one active purchase per Nintendo Account allowed.

This is very forward thinking of Nintendo, by keeping rentals to one game at a time, they won't have to spend so much on restocking the eShop and it'll force gamers to try out new titles they might not have even heard of. If all 15 copies of Super Mario 64 are on rental right now, no problem, put your name down and now you have priority when a game comes back into stock. In the meantime you can rent Tonic Trouble and if Mario 64 is available before your rental period is over you can cancel the remaining time on your current rental and add those hours/days onto your new game, up to an additional 2 hours playtime or 5 days of rental time.

Sony and Microsoft will be struggling to restock their digital Halo and Uncharted games to keep up with demand as users abuse the ability to download multiple titles at once, while the less popular titles remain completely untouched. Nintendo, on the other hand, will be making smart use of its full library and teaching its customers the value of patience and opening their minds to new experiences.



Barkley said:
DreadPirateRoberts said:

The people with hacked Switches represent a negligible share of Switch owners.  Also, to be blunt, the majority of those people were never going to pay for legacy games in the first place.  

That's not my point. My point is that people can get retro games running on every device under the sun, sometimes in a matter of days. It should be a doddle for Nintendo yet they don't do it. Neither did Sony with PS1 on PS4. I understand third party games would require contracts/agreements or whatever but their first party games should have been up ages ago.

Don't know what takes these companies so long.

Snes, GBA, GB, GBC and N64 games are all playable on the Switch with emulators, why can't Nintendo themselves do it?

Those people also often see that hardware bricked as a result of shoddy porting and emulation.

The quality is often not up to par.

Nintendo can never risk that sort of thing, they need QA.



I describe myself as a little dose of toxic masculinity.

Jumpin said:
Barkley said:

That's not my point. My point is that people can get retro games running on every device under the sun, sometimes in a matter of days. It should be a doddle for Nintendo yet they don't do it. Neither did Sony with PS1 on PS4. I understand third party games would require contracts/agreements or whatever but their first party games should have been up ages ago.

Don't know what takes these companies so long.

Snes, GBA, GB, GBC and N64 games are all playable on the Switch with emulators, why can't Nintendo themselves do it?

Those people also often see that hardware bricked as a result of shoddy porting and emulation.

The quality is often not up to par.

Nintendo can never risk that sort of thing, they need QA.

No they don't, I've never heard of a case of a homebrew emulator bricking a device. Nintendo can have QA doesn't mean it takes over 2 years to get SNES games running.



Predictions (Made July 2019)

LTD: PS4 - 130m, Switch - 110m, XBO - 52m       2019 : PS4 - 15m, Switch - 18.8m, XBO - 4.8m        2020: Switch - 22m (Peak Year)


Around the Network

And yet Nintendo continues the ridiculous dripfeed of games going for their online shop. They should have literally had every single first party NES, SNES and Gameboy game available for purchase since day one, but instead its maybe 1 or 2 games a week if we're lucky, most of which are either games I wouldn't spend more than five minutes on or games I've already played dozens of times on several different platforms.



Talk is cheap.... nintendo could easily get emulators running their "past" games on the Switch, its just their too lazy, or dont actually want to allow it.

So its easy to say the PR friendly thing, but actions speak louder.
Switch is still missing the virtual console.



I don't think Nintendo will ever sell their legacy titles again. At best Nintendo will rent than via online subscription.



Read a lengthy article about that...can't remember where, but the jist was, that Nintendo seems to be afraid, that their retro catalogue would cannibalize the indie releases, which kinda makes sense.

"Don't wanna spend 20 bucks on Wargroove or Into The Breach? Here's Advance Wars for 5."



RolStoppable said:
Doesn't it look obvious that Nintendo plans to make more old games available in chronological order of past consoles? The longterm plan is to have a consistent revenue stream from subscriptions, so SNES games won't come until NES games are nearing their end and so on.

You can also expect the subscription fee to increase in price once more classic console games are available.

The subscription model works for Nintendo as well, because it doesn't inherently devalue the IP. You can pay for timed access (monthly, yearly etc.) but you are never paying peanuts to buy their IP.