By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
thismeintiel on 17 January 2017
Edit Thread
Faelco said:
thismeintiel said:

Another day, another obvious thing Nintendo should have done, but doesn't is excused.  My guess is if the online is just as poor as the Wii U's, but Nintendo decides to charge $50 for it, with nothing but NES games to give in return, it will be excused by the same people, as well.

Nintendo could charge $600 for the console and it would still be excused, with "$600 is worth it to play the Wii U Zelda but in slightly better conditions". 

 

Of course being unable to charge while playing is unacceptable in 2017. I already had this issue once, with my Wiimote and the rechargeable battery I had, and it's awful not being able to play when you have time because you forgot to charge it beforehand.

 

But hey, like when you were not supposed to be able to play the Xbox One when not connected to Internet once a day, it's the consumer's fault for not preparing his gaming sessions properly, right? 

So true.  It seems with the Switch Nintendo has switched (pun intended) to being more anti-consumer.  Nickel and diming their diehard fans for all they are worth.  But, they know their fans truly are diehard and will pay whatever.  They haven't proven with their free network that they have improved, like Sony had to do, before they decided to charge for it, anyway.  And those fans are like.."Sure. Even if it's poor at launch, it'll eventually get better.  No voice chat or other features at launch, besides online play?  And voice chat is more like calling a friend instead of actually being through their network?  Oh well, it's only 2017, they haven't had enough time to prove they can run a competent network worth paying for."