Runa216 said:
mZuzek said:
Entitled for paying $300 on the console, $60 on the game, and a monthly fee to my internet provider? Yes, yes I am. Paying for an online service is only acceptable if said service is decent to begin with... but P2P isn't just bad, it's actually not a service at all, and I'm not sure you understand that. The other consoles can get away with paid online because not only is the service as a whole much better, but they have loads and loads of online-centric games which actually use SERVERS. Nintendo has one online-centric game and it's P2P, which was the standard for online games like 15 years ago, and guess what, it was free. When servers started becoming the norm, that's when paid online started becoming the norm, so yes, I feel quite rightfully entitled. (And yeah technically I didn't pay $300 on the console because I got it for free in a giveaway, but that isn't Nintendo's problem.) | And if you paid 300 for a console, you can still use that console. If you pay 60 for a game, then you can still use that game (unless it is online only, and that's not a Nintendo exclusive idea) If you pay for your internet service, you can still use internet. But that doesn't entitle you to use Nintendo's online service, which was stated from the get-go would have a fee associated with it. It's almost like you don't understand how economics work. You don't get to buy the burger and just assume the french fries are free and get angry because you have to pay the combo price to get pop and chips to go with it.
|
The correct analogy would be buying a burger, say a Big Mac to be more specific, but not getting the lettuce and mayo unless you pay extra. The base price of a game already covers the cost of online play, so the only reason to have an additional charge to play the game is greed. Dunno if you work for Nintendo or are just a diehard fan with how obsessively you're trying to change people's minds, but it ain't gonna happen, best just accept it and move on.
