In what world is it arrogant for a company to charge below the average MSRP on hardware/subscription services, and around the average for AAA software, coming of the second best selling hardware of all time? MP4B is $60USD on S1, Mario Galaxy 1+2 is $35/game for some of the greatest video games of all time, featuring a plethora of improvements (graphically and even in the gameplay: They added a Storybook to SMG2, for instance, alongside a new Assist Mods.) And yes, the ports are very lazy, but (i) this is just Nintendo being Nintendo (ever since the GBA), and (ii) that’s not arrogance as much as it is a business being a business— they can make a quick buck off the consumers who really wanna play these games of their Switch 2 system. This is a product of worthy value to many Nintendo consumers who likely don’t own any means to play these Nintendo classics on the go.

Feels like the same conclusion, just different words.  The S1 was crazy successful and so Nintendo is milking it.  Getting knocked a peg, e.g. make less money, will force any company (including Nintendo) to be more consumer friendly.  We shouldn't be cheer leaders, but we should want consumer friendly products.  

I mean seriously, blocking music behind a paywall??  That isn't crazy to you?  

(i) Amiibo cards cost no more than $5USD on Etsy. (ii) Judging by Nintendo heavy emphasis on restricting Amiibo functionality to nothing more than trivial features across all other games, this seems more like an instance of Nintendo not recognizing how much value there is in allowing players earlier access to greater customization in the music you place in the desert. (Which TBF that really isn’t anything major. Nobody and I mean nobody will purchase a $35USD Amiibo for something as trivial as music customization.)

Also, I edited my previous message as you were responding…so it seems you missed a lot of adjustments to my points.

So, you are ok with putting game music behind a paywall?  

You don't think music would help the boring *** desert?  

You can unlock the customizable music without the Amiibo. If you are so impatient as to spend $35USD to get the music sooner, then more power to ya I suppose lol. Though that clearly wasn’t Nintendo’s intention, again based off literally every other use of Amiibo post-Wii U.

Hmphf. I’m gonna stop arguing now… IDK why I let these remarks get to me. Why should it bother me that somebody consumes and regurgitates talking points from outrage slop?

Can I unlock the music without paying extra?  

So you are ok with music behind a paywall?  

You don't think music would help the boring desert?

Simple questions my friend.  Since you won't answer I will for you.

No, I can't.  Music costs extra, minimum of $5.

It isn't ok, that is BS and anti-consumer.

Music absolutely is fundamental with setting atmosphere, in-game music should NEVER be behind a paywall. 

There is nothing "slop" about not liking music behind a paywall.  Being a blind consumer doesn't benefit us.  We should push back against anti-consumer nonsense, against all companies.  It includes Nintendo, Sony, MS, Nvidia, Intel, AMD, etc.  

I will use a great example; I avoid games on Steam that require separate launchers like Ubi.  I won't support Epic game exclusives. PC shop exclusives are not good for gamers.  I will not buy Diablo until they drop the Battle Net requirement.  There is nothing wrong with pushing back against anti-consumer BS.  It is a far scream from "slop."  Especially when, out of the gates, you wholly mischaracterized my post.  

I'm not sure what exact example this is but Nintendo does lock day one content behind Amiibo's. That much is a fact. It's trivial content but content none the less. It's completely fair that people are irked by that practice.

But based of that thread that you created about focusing on enjoying games without the negativity, I just wouldn't engage if you don't want to hear other people's criticism and annoyances.

Upon having looking further into, it seems you (and Checkler) are correct: I was under the misconception that the Amiibo wasn’t a requirement. That’s my bad.

Anywhooo… yea i gotta just ignore these ppl. I mean why get so hung up on that? The logic here is equivalent to something like “Oh! Valve locked this trivial piece of gameplay content behind a paywall. Value is greedy slop that deserves to flop!!” Whether that content be something like a custom skin on the characters in Half-Life, or some extra options for music in the Portal levels. Not even worth the time. Again, it’s just regurgitating outrage slop— what are you fighting on behalf of the consumer for in this context? Their right to have some music in a desert level? Come on now lol this is just getting ridiculous.

Except you are fighting an argument that doesn't exist.  Nobody said they wanted the S2 to flop.  If you are going to have a discourse, you should be honest about the topic, not making up things that were never said.  

And music is a key aspect of gaming, putting it on the same level as a character skin is nonsense.