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

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Nintendo Really Is Out of Touch

That person was making money out of literal piracy, what did you expect Nintendo to do

Having said that I wish the Virtual Console came back.

Last edited by Link_Nines.XBC - on 17 August 2021

Around the Network
Wman1996 said:
aikohualda said:

out of cusiosity.... what have playstation done with their old games? not putting a hate on sony... but have they done better than nintendo?

From what I can gather, they're not as adamant about shutting down ROM sites of their games. Somebody please correct me if I'm wrong.

Hundreds of PS3 games are available on PS Now, though they are unfortunately streaming only. 

Dozens of emulated PS2 titles are available on PS4 for purchase, and some are even on PS Now.

PS3 and Vita stores remain open at the moment. PS3 has PS1 and PS2 classics, Vita has PS1 Classics and PSP titles.

Switch has a lackluster assortment of titles linked to their online service. Why only NES and SNES? Where's Game Boy? N64?

3DS and Wii U have tons of classic titles on their still open eShops, but most of them are overpriced.

Sony has work to do, but they seem to be handling things better than Nintendo. What makes it even worse for Nintendo is the sheer embarrassment of riches they are sitting on compared to Microsoft and Sony. 

Adding hundreds more legacy titles from about 6 more unused legacy platforms would help Nintendo so much.

thank you sir! :)



 

aikohualda said:
Wman1996 said:

From what I can gather, they're not as adamant about shutting down ROM sites of their games. Somebody please correct me if I'm wrong.

Hundreds of PS3 games are available on PS Now, though they are unfortunately streaming only. 

Dozens of emulated PS2 titles are available on PS4 for purchase, and some are even on PS Now.

PS3 and Vita stores remain open at the moment. PS3 has PS1 and PS2 classics, Vita has PS1 Classics and PSP titles.

Switch has a lackluster assortment of titles linked to their online service. Why only NES and SNES? Where's Game Boy? N64?

3DS and Wii U have tons of classic titles on their still open eShops, but most of them are overpriced.

Sony has work to do, but they seem to be handling things better than Nintendo. What makes it even worse for Nintendo is the sheer embarrassment of riches they are sitting on compared to Microsoft and Sony. 

Adding hundreds more legacy titles from about 6 more unused legacy platforms would help Nintendo so much.

thank you sir! :)

^This!! Nintendo is too out of touch to realize how much this would help the Switch, and help it's successor!!



Mandalore76 said:
Wman1996 said:

From what I can gather, they're not as adamant about shutting down ROM sites of their games. Somebody please correct me if I'm wrong.

Hundreds of PS3 games are available on PS Now, though they are unfortunately streaming only. 

Dozens of emulated PS2 titles are available on PS4 for purchase, and some are even on PS Now.

PS3 and Vita stores remain open at the moment. PS3 has PS1 and PS2 classics, Vita has PS1 Classics and PSP titles.

Switch has a lackluster assortment of titles linked to their online service. Why only NES and SNES? Where's Game Boy? N64?

3DS and Wii U have tons of classic titles on their still open eShops, but most of them are overpriced.

Sony has work to do, but they seem to be handling things better than Nintendo. What makes it even worse for Nintendo is the sheer embarrassment of riches they are sitting on compared to Microsoft and Sony. 

Adding hundreds more legacy titles from about 6 more unused legacy platforms would help Nintendo so much.

While the Switch itself does need more legacy platform support added, their pricing structures that are still available on the Wii U and 3DS virtual consoles have at least been uniform.  All NES games are $4.99, all SNES games are $7.99, all N64 games are $9.99, etc.  Whereas the PlayStation Store prices vary on games from the same system.  Take PS1 for example, Suikoden is $5.99, but Suikoden II is $9.99.  Castlevania Chronicles is $5.99, but Castlevania Symphony of the Night is $9.99.  Tomb Raider 2 is $5.99, but the original Tomb Raider is $9.99?  Meanwhile, every Final Fantasy is $9.99, including Origins and Tactics.  It's like they purposely price the more popular games at 2x the price of the rest of the library.  That would be like if the Wii U and 3DS eShop charged $4.99 for Mario Bros, but $8.99 for Super Mario Bros, etc.

The same disparity pertains to the PS2 games listed on PSN.  Some games are $9.99, while other popular titles like Grand Theft Auto III & Red Dead Revolver are $14.99 for example.  

True. It is kind of nice to have uniform pricing (mostly) for Nintendo VC games.

Sony is more over the place, and with bigger price tiers.

However, the point I was trying to make was this.

What's a better value? N64 games for $10 on Wii U or PS2 titles like Persona 3 and Persona 4 for $10 on PS3? 

Would you rather pay $10 for most DS titles on Wii U, or $6 for most PS1 titles on PS3 or Vita?

I know there are some apples to oranges comparisons, but still.

I can understand Nintendo charging $5 for NES, $8 for SNES, and $10 for N64 games when the Wii launched in 2006. But it needed an overhaul in the 3DS and Wii U games. And they ever sell them to us again, they need to be a lot cheaper. NES games should be about $2 a piece.



Lifetime Sales Predictions 

Switch: 144 million (was 73, then 96, then 113 million, then 125 million)

PS5: 105 million Xbox Series S/X: 60 million

PS4: 120 mil (was 100 then 130 million, then 122 million) Xbox One: 51 mil (was 50 then 55 mil)

3DS: 75.5 mil (was 73, then 77 million)

"Let go your earthly tether, enter the void, empty and become wind." - Guru Laghima

konnichiwa said:
The_Yoda said:

I don't think Nintendo is any different than Disney, they make stuff available for a while then let it slip back into the vault.  It isn't lost forever it is under lock and key until the next time they want to monetize it.

Isn't most stuff on Disney+?

They rotate the selection on Disney+ adding old movies on and taking others off.  It would be a better service if you had access to their entire library (baring new releases still in theaters) . 

Disney+ still has a long way to go in my opinion their streaming is sub-par.  Where I have zero issues with Netflix, Hulu+, Prime, Vudu ... they are so bad about the stream getting interrupted that on a couple occasions I got fed up and just went upstairs and grabbed the blu-ray so I could watch it without interruptions at 5 to 10 minute intervals. Kind of surprising out of a company with that much money and that already has a stake in a decent streaming service via a 60% share of Hulu. 



Around the Network
CaptainExplosion said:

https://kotaku.com/nintendo-sues-rom-site-into-oblivion-1847005315

Look, I get it, you don't like piracy, no company likes piracy, and the guy you're shutting down was really sketchy, but Nintendo, you haven't done hardly jack shit to preserve your older games library.

Instead of Virtual Console the Switch has a substandard subscription system that was last updated with games nobody even remembered or cared about, you made Super Mario 3D All-Stars a limited release for some bullshit reason, same with the long-awaited English version of the original Fire Emblem, and there is still no word on new systems coming to Switch Online.

Nintendo's thinking is as backwards as ever. -_-

Bad take mate



Just a guy who doesn't want to be bored. Also

Unfortunately Nintendo still has that 80s & 90s Disney mentality where they think keeping some of their most beloved classics locked in the "vault" save for a few limited time releases here and there like the NES / SNES Classic consoles for example is still the way to go.

With the ever increasing popularity of streaming services where people gladly pay a recurring monthly fee to access some of their favorite entertainment both past and present, you'd think Nintendo would be all over it and create something like a "Nin-flix" digital subscription service where you have exclusive access to a vast library of their classics spanning several console eras like the NES, SNES, N64, GB, GBA etc. I know there's obviously licensing issues with 3rd party IPs and several of those classics are only currently available in collection packs i.e Castlevania, Mega Man, Contra etc, but at least those 3rd parties are making their titles available through a wide variety of online services.

It's like Nintendo loves tormenting its own fanbase by holding back classic titles like Earthbound on their own online service while essentially forcing customers to pay for it if they want to enjoy features like online multiplayer. I'd rather pay $50 or $60 a year if I know I'm getting access a chunk of the classic 8-64 bit library rather than $20 for a sub-par online service.



On 2/24/13, MB1025 said:
You know I was always wondering why no one ever used the dollar sign for $ony, but then I realized they have no money so it would be pointless.

Your OP is out of touch.

If the guy is pirating Switch games, and making money out of it oO, then you have nothing to stand on



Also, what is this clown show of bashing Nintendo at whatever chance? It's old.



AngryLittleAlchemist said:

I don't blame Nintendo for what they're doing, I don't blame people who download ROMs for doing what they're doing either

Yeah. I wanted to play Earthbound but I don't have a New 3DS or Wii U and Nintendo refuses to put this game on Switch... So I end up downloading a ROM and playing on a emulator. Would love to play it legally but oh well. I think I may do the same thing with Chrono Trigger and Super Mario RPG too. Really wish I could at least buy these games on a modern Nintendo platform that I own but in the end I will play them, legally or not.

Shutting down a ROM site profiting with piracy is 100% okay too, just to be clear.