Pay to Play

[Captain Fabio]

So, since the announcement of the Nintendo Switch, we have learnt that to play online, you will need to pay a fee. There are no details on what this is yet, but you can expect it to be a monthly/annually paid fee, much like Xbox Live.

The question is, what are your thoughts on the whole 'Pay 2 Play' (online) in the gaming community? We have Steam that is free, along with Sony's PS4, but offers a paid platform with benefits. On the flip side, you have Microsoft and now Nintendo. There has always been an aspect of Pay 2 Play in Video Games, with PC games like World of Warcraft requiring paying to access servers, but do you think it should even be a thing anymore? With how expensive games and consoles are, is it fair in your eyes? Is it justified?​

 

[El Héroe Oscuro]

It makes sense, like Incineroar said. $5 a month isn't a whole lot - speaking in terms of Xbox as that's my platform - and on top of it, you get free games every month. In essence, you are actually getting more bang for your buck, as as long as your four free games per month (again, speaking in terms of Xbox) equate to a value for more than $5 than you are actually profiting on the service. I don't exactly know where the money off of these services goes towards, but if it goes towards keeping servers up longer like Incineroar proposed than that's an added bonus.

I wonder what this will mean for games like Pokémon though, where online play through the GTS and online tournaments are usually free. Will some games not have payment requirements?

I think it will be paid. Might not be immediate, but it will transition eventually. Or we can just bring back this beast to compromise.

Spoiler:

 

[Arsenic]

Oh I should have read the thread before I voted. I thought it was about free to play games with advantage giving micro transactions. Their program looks like a mirror of other consoles plans too, right down to the monthly free game (which hints at older games being available? No way their giving out a launch title for free)

Either way I don't like that plan on any system. Though I've come to just accept it as the status quo. Nintendo has just as much a right to suck their customers dry as the other big shots.

I didn't watch the event anyways, because I knew nothing they could say would convince me to buy the switch. But I wasn't expecting them to make me want it even less! Good play Nintendo, good play.

 

[Kameken]

It's garbage. No one had to do it before, no one has to do it now.

Can't you still play online on the PS3 for free? That's all the proof needed that this is just money grabbing because they can get away with it.

 

[Nah]

I don't really care for needing to pay money in order to make use of a console's online services. I paid for the system, I paid for the games, we pay for the internet connection, why do I need to shell out even more money just to be able to make use of the online stuff? Haven't you gotten enough of my money already? And like we're talking about big name companies here, I doubt they're starving for cash.

Especially considering how much of a staple online services and activities are for gaming these days.

 

[Esper]

This is making me reconsider the Switch. I've never purchased a new console right when it came out and I was thinking I might do it this time, but now I'm not sure. It's not that the cost would be necessarily too high, just that everything else seems to have a subscription. I'm already paying for my internet and Netflix and all the rest each month and it adds up. It's death by a thousand cuts. No one service is too high, but together it gets to be too much.

 

[EC]

I stopped paying for PS+ because I didn't want to do two subscription services (XBL being the other one). So, unless the Nintendo service is a bargain, or has can't miss online games, I probably won't do this one either.

 

[Hermione Granger]

PS+ and Gold are worth the money to me for the games offered to play, but for the Switch if I get one I doubt I would pay since I'm not into NES or SNES games and how nintendo worded it makes it sound you can only keep it for a month.

 

[mew_nani]

I feel bad for parents who have kids that want to play something like Pokemon or Super Smash Bros. on this thing. You gotta pay for the console, the game, possibly extra peripherals (I'm not really sure on that part, I guess it would depend on the game), possibly an SD card, possibly a smartphone just for the voice chat app if they don't have one already, and now on top of all of that a monthly fee just so they could play Pokemon or Splatoon and use the online multiplayer functions that up until now have been free. How's anyone supposed to afford all that? I get game consoles are expensive but geez loise, what's a poor kid who can only get this thing by asking their parents to give it to them for their birthday or for Christmas supposed to do? Or heck what if you're looking to have more than one console and happen to want to have a good library for both and use online functionality on them?

Since when does basic functionality need to have such a premium attached to it? Isn't it enough we bought the game, the console, the peripherals, and the internet used to go online? A large chunk of video gaming revolves around multiplayer, and while not all games use or need this it's still something that can't be ignored. It's bad enough that Sony and Microsoft do it and their primary audience is teens and up, but Nintendo's primary audience is kids, and by extension their parents. What the heck are they supposed to do? It's a mess, and even if they give you monthly rentals of games you probably already own on other consoles with online functionality, something a lot of emulators already have access to, I don't really see how it's worth it. It's just extortion.

 

[Megan]

One of Nintendo's main draws has always been local multiplayer. I'd say that they just ultimately decided to let this be the main focus, even enforce it more by making the Switch portable. At the same time they split online multiplayer and made it paid so it stays an option, however it also becomes more of a commitment. Nintendo knows that people only have so much money to spend. The only ones who will use the online mode are going to be those who mainly focus on playing Nintendo games and those who have a lot of money.

Not sure what I think about myself on that matter, though. Never payed for online gaming services, because I usually avoid paying more money than I need to. I guess I would be down for it, if I had games I really enjoy playing online, if the online fee is not too high and if the community revolving around online play isn't a toxic one of the kind "don't play if you have a bad internet connection".

 

[Aisu]

As others have said before me, paying a monthly online fee on top of what was already paid for the console, games, accessories is a lot to ask for. I personally don't play online very much at all, but what about a kid that begs his parents to buy a Switch, then they don't want to shell out the extra cash for online, plus no local friends? That's kind of a kick in the nuts there.

 

[Judge Mandolore Shepard]

When it comes to Pay to Play, my opinion depends on the system. I have been an Xbox player since last decade, as for when I started paying for Gold Membership for Xbox Live, I have been doing that since 2008 or 2009. I go for the one year plan, which I pay $60 for one year's Gold Membership.

As for one of the games I play that requires payment, one month's payment is only $16.35 which is cheap.