By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
superchunk on 01 February 2014
Edit Thread
sethnintendo said:
superchunk said:

Let's just take networking. GC/GBA gen had no networking capabilities. Nintendo at that point has virtually zero experience with mass market level networking and online gaming. Unlike MSony who have multiple divisions that have worked with this type of technology for decades.

With Wii/DS this proved to be true as their first attempt at such a network was largely dismal. It was clearly lacking in major details and multiple titles proved that it wasn't really ready for the type of scale and functionality expected from a modern gaming network.

I suppose the ethernet addon I bought to play Phatasy Star Online for the GC along with the monthly subscription fee to Sega was all just a dream. 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phantasy_Star_Online

They also released

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phantasy_Star_Online_Episode_III:_C.A.R.D._Revolution

Granted there was no eshop or anything close to what they offer now but there was online for GC granted it was only 2 games.  I have to say Nintendo isn't too far behind in online and at least it is still free.  They just need to improve the VC service and make improvements to Miiverse for now.  I see nothing that Sony or Microsoft have in terms of online capabilities that makes me jealous.  Sure PSN+ seems like a good service but I'd rather own my games.  The only other online complaint is about the ids tied to the system.  They seem to be making strides in this area with merging the 3DS and Wii U eshop accounts.  Eventually they won't have it tied to the systems. 

Holy shit fuck. Are you goddamn serious? One tiny attachment that was no where near successful does not mean GC had online. No one in their right mind would make a claim GC had an online infrastructure which is exactly my point. With that ridiculas logic I could claim NES in Japan had networking with its famicom modem, right?