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

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Nintendo to offer Wii DLC and you have to pay for some online games X_X

Bodhesatva said:

They can do this -- make a system like the Wii. 

Buuuuut that doesn't seem to make most people happy. Otherwise, there doesn't seem to be any magic fairy dust that will magically make games significantly cheaper to develop. Even the vaunted middleware, which probably is helping, can't bring costs back down to PS2 levels or even (I suspect) close to them. And what happens next generation? More middleware will need to be developed, which will cost more billions, all to bring costs to an even higher plateau than they're on now. 


Well actually it does seem to make most people happy, judging by sales.  Just not most people on internet forums hehe.



Around the Network

OMFG TEH WIIZ IS DOOMED, UR ONLINE IS GHEY. @#%#%$$#%

Ummm as long as it's for MMO's and stuff thats fine and dandy :P Hell I wish they'd bring some MMO's to the PSN -_-; I'd pay the game producers monthly subscription for stuff like that.



From 0 to KICKASS in .stupid seconds.

i really don't have a problem with pay to play actually. i mean really, servers aren't free nor is the upkeep. i actually like the idea that you only pay to play for the specific games you own/want to play online instead of xbl methodology cause i'm more of a single player kind of guy so i don't really use online pay enough to justify it.

obviously free is always preferable to costs money but i'm perfectly happy to pay for a service that is worth they money. my guess is that pay to play service will be at the choice of the developer. nintendo probably will have free online for all of their games and other developers probably won't use it unless they can really justify the online aspect to the consumer thus limiting it to MMOesque games.

...and just you watch...psn won't be free forever. servers cost a lot of money to buy and maintain.



naznatips said:
The_vagabond7 said:
Again, how is this different from PCs? Any PC gamers here? This is just like PC online gaming. Each developer decides whether or not you'll pay to play their game online. The only difference is you can pay with wiipoints, instead of paying each developer individually with a credit card.

This isn't even new. Games like Phantasy Star online, and Final Fantasy XI already did/do this.

People are freaking out over a complete non-issue.

Pardon my French Vagabond, but what the hell are you talking about? The only PC online services that charge anything are MMOs and Windows Live. PC online is and always will be 99% free. Now, if this is just for MMOs (which is what I think) then it will be like PCs, but random games aren't charged for.


Exactly. Odds are pretty much anything other than MMOs will still be free. You don't have to pay to play online for some random FPS, but if some company is putting alot of time and money into maintaining servers, they will probably charge for it. Not even all MMOs you have to pay to play online. Odds are 90% of wii games will be free to play online, but if somebody wants to make a game with a dedicated server, they should be able to charge for it. Nintendo is providing a way to do so. Sorry if I wasn't clearer in my point.



You can find me on facebook as Markus Van Rijn, if you friend me just mention you're from VGchartz and who you are here.

Diomedes1976 said:
If its only for MMO then its ok .If its for many games it SUCKS big time .

For me the way for the future of online gaming is the current Sony model .Free online play ,pay for downloadable things and games ,totally lagfree ....and with the userbase pushing for them to refine slowly the service (XMB ingame ,Home ,Trophies ,etc ) .

So it seems. That's propably why Nintendo just copied it.

Ei Kiinasti.

Eikä Japanisti.

Vaan pannaan jalalla koreasti.

 

Nintendo games sell only on Nintendo system.

Around the Network

I think people are starting to go overboard when they don't know the full details just yet, just there will be pay to play games, and it could be a good thing, we might see Nintendo drop FCs due to it, or something else of the sort, they know whoever pays to play a game is usually not a kid or a casual play a couple of times a week gamer, so most likely I'm seeing any pay to play game having no FCs that's my prediction and I'm sticking to it.



MaxwellGT2000 - "Does the amount of times you beat it count towards how hardcore you are?"

Wii Friend Code - 5882 9717 7391 0918 (PM me if you add me), PSN - MaxwellGT2000, XBL - BlkKniteCecil, MaxwellGT2000

OMG better not be for mario kart and brawl !!!



ssj12 said:
naznatips said:
ssj12 said:
this probably will kill off 80% of any 3rd party online games. Why make charge customers for a poor service when XBL and the PSN are better.

SSJ this is a total bullshit post.

1) Clearly, this system won't even be in 80% of games, or it would already be in Mario Kart and Brawl.  It's obviously designed for special circumsatnces.

2) We don't know what services will be offered for these games.  

3) We don't even know if this is just a system reserved for MMOs or other games with extremely complex online systems or not.  


 I was meaning it as if they force it to be implemented into 3rd party games. Why would Nintendo charge customers for their own games? From what I can tell its either going to be either only MMOs... which we will only see two or three on any console anyways, or be used as the main network for third parties similar to XBL minus 1st party titles being effected. 

 


Uh-oh... Mod fight!

On-topic:

We've already came to the conclusion that this is probably going to only be for MMOs (though we don't have confirmation yet), but the real question is, will you have to pay for each MMO you want to play or not?  Also, if this isn't for MMOs, and for third party games, will you have to pay to play GH4 online?  and then pay for Madden 09 online, Mario Kart, SSBB, etc.  A fee for each game?  cause that'd suck.

I think that it will be for all games, because if it's up to developers, you may end up paying for every online game you play. 

Food for thought.



random thought : zackblue for new mod instead of ssj!!



Neos - "If I'm posting in this thread it's just for the lulz."
Tag by the one and only Fkusumot!


 

Bodhesatva said:

I want to ask this question more generally, because I think it's an important point. For anyone who's looked at MS and Sony's financial statements for the last 2 or 3 years, it's pretty apparent that they have to make more money somehow. And in case you thought this was a momentary, 2-3 year blip, the situation has generally gotten worse, not better; Sony made more money in the PS1 era (Despite the PS2 being a more popular console both in hardware and software sold), and it's readily apparent that they'll make a lot less money in the PS3 era. What we may think is a lot of money -- 600 dollar PS3, 400 dollar Xbox 360s, 60 dollar games -- clearly isn't enough.

They have to make more money. What do you suggest they do? I'll give you some options:

1) Decrease the power of the consoles in the future. Take the Wii route, and take small steps.

2) Increase the price of the hardware

3) Increase the price of the games

4) Introduce for-pay downloadable content

5) Introduce an online subscription service

Option 1 seems to be completely unacceptable to a lot of people. Option 2 and 3 seem almost absurd, as people are complaining about the prices of the PS3 and 360 even now, when their respective companies have bled billions to push them at their current costs.

Number 4 has already been put in place by all 3 companies, and for Microsoft and Sony, it clearly isn't enough to stem the tide.

So that leaves number 5. Am I missing something? Is there some error in my calculations here? Because from what I see, subscription costs are simply a necessity. Or we can all buy Wiis. Or they can sell the PS3 for 800 dollars. You chose, because Sony and Microsoft aren't going to be happy bleeding billions upon billions of dollars for eternity.

 


Isn't number 2 some of the reasons why PC gaming has died? Too expensive hardware (for most games at least, and the more hardcore games usually have high spec requirements), along with unreliable software. And I think the only problem most people have this time around is the great difference between the Wii's power and the HD consoles power. I don't think anyone (from this forum) complained that the PS2 wasn't as powerful as the GC or Xbox. Why weren't people saying that games should be put on those consoles because they'd look better?

It seems Naz is right. Only a few people care about graphics, and they should either get a nice computer and help the real graphic machine, or deal with less than "great" graphics. Otherwise, it won't be casuals that destroy the market. It'll be the hardcores.