They have NES Online and SNES Online, where you pay 5 bucks a month and get access to games plus online.
But in my opinion, even for 5 bucks..its woefully inadequate. It has the classic Nintenod first party games (mario and etc)...but I find the selection really bad. Considering these games came out almost 35 years ago..there should be 100s of them...but there isn't...and they rarely update the catalogue and when they do...it seems always from the same 3rd party company and I never heard of them.
Considering Game Pass is 11 dollars and you get brand new first party titles and over 200ish of newer games....the 5$ is still overpriced. I would pay 10$ if they had 300ish NES games and etc.
Every virtual game store Nintendo has is overpriced.
You're better off buying one of those retro consoles that have 100 arcade games, or the Steam Sega Genesis collection or something.
__________________ What CDTM believes;
Never let anyone else define you. Don't be a jerk just to be a jerk, but if you are expressing your true inner feelings and beliefs, or at least trying to express that inner child, and everyone gets pissed off about it, never NEVER apologize for it. Let them think what they want, let them define you in their narrow little minds while they suppress every last piece of them just to keep a friend that never liked them for themselves in the first place.
Nintendo are greedy son of bitches when it comes to this stuff....they would make more money if they partnered with the big companies from 35 years ago (konami, capcom) and add hundreds of NES titles on the NES Online service....and charge like 10 bucks.
Currently, the service is entirely lacking of content and its a major shame.
I mean there are some Capcom games on Switch SNES online like Super Ghouls 'N Ghosts and Demon's Crest. Nintendo may have gotten what they could from them, but Capcom otherwise as well as Konami may have preferred to re-release their classic game collections individually as a bundle, which is why you only see Castlevania as such there and not on NES/SNES online.
I don't know, but it definitely would've been a better deal for Nintendo to have teamed up with them on the virtual library as a whole. I'll be honest, as much as some have clamored for an N64 online for the Switch or like a Classic 64 Mini, I'd rather not see it because of all the important games I know it would not have.
Maybe you are right...but I think Nintendo could probably do more than they are now with some of the old classic games.
If Microsoft can setup Game Pass with some of these companies for games that 100% more expensive to product and are much newer...I think Nintendo would be willing to do something similar for pre-1995 games.
But I assume Nintendo wants nothing to do with that....but it would be amazing if the Switch was NES and SNES playing machine with hundreds/hundreds of titles available that can be simply downloaded easily for a monthly fee. To me....that's a bigger system seller than all but 1 Switch game (Zelda).
I can't see Capcom saying no to that..considering they have released most of RE titles on Game Pass and I think PS Now.
Key point being it comes with Nintendo Switch Online.
I'm going a bit against the grain here, but it feels completely worth it to me. Remember, unlike PSNow and Game Pass, NES and SNES Online aren't standalone services you pay extra for. They're included in the price of your Nintendo Switch Online membership, which you need anyway to play online. The SNES/NES game libraries are just additional perks that come with it.
It's only 4$ a month, and 20$ a year. The annual option comes out to about $1.60 a month. That's lightyears cheaper than any other online service, and the SNES/NES libraries are included with it.
It's honestly pretty fair from where I'm sitting. The in-built emulator on the Switch is pretty amazing from what I've played too. I do wish they'd look into adding N64 games though, or even doing a price increase for Wii/WiiU/3DS games.
Last edited by StyleTime on Jul 15th, 2021 at 01:02 AM
For what is worth, they have delay based netcode for the NES games and rollback netcode for SNES games; the ones that you can do 2 player online.
I think the service is okay-ish but could definitely be better, and I certainly understand those that are dissatisfied with it. If any N64 or other kind of games get added at some point, can see the appeal for online play functionality at least.
Yeah but... I wish they had more of those NES/SNES games, and yeah, N64 would be awesome.
However, if it ends up being $59.99 like it's competitors just to add Wii/WiiU/3DS games? Yeah I'm gonna have to opt out. I like playing Splatoon 2 and Smash, but not if it costs me an arm and a leg to do so. Yes it's for a whole year, but I'm more then happy with the $20 per year. I haven't paid for Xbox Live or whatever they're calling it these days, or PS Plus in years, and I don't plan to solely because of the prices.
With all the services you're expected to pay for now-a-days, it all adds up.
This post aged well, looking at the price increase for N64 and Genesis for Switch online. You weren't too far off from what the price would be, anyway.
It's more then double the amount because N64 and Genesis. I mean Genesis games are cool but let's be real, there's a Sega Collectiion on the Switch ALREADY.
Realistically we are paying for N64. $30 and they're still drip-feeding us as well. The only reason I'd even consider it is because I never got to finish Banjo-Kazooie on my Xbox because my eyesight sucks and also because I really hate sitting up-right.
I have the 3D Mario All-Stars Collection so I could care less about one of the main draws.
The fact is?... They are close to PS and Xbox levels and they frankly just give you so much more on their services. Access to tonssss of games for free, exclusive deals, etc.
On top of that, Switch Online's online isn't... the best? Very weird the price for this thing.
Yeah, I still stand by what I said about the base level membership, but this...
This "expansion" is BS. It's more than twice the cost of the base Switch Online membership, for just N64 and Genesis games? For 50$, I'd expect Gamecube and Wii games at a minimum.
This sucks, as I was really looking forward to this. I am willing to pay for convenience as I've said before, but I'd rather emulate than pay 50$ for 30 year old console libraries.
Nintendo is getting backlash for it, so maybe we'll see a response. The official Nintendo Youtube announcement has two times as many dislikes as likes.
We have seen companies alter things with enough negative feedback, so maybe they will come to their senses if no one is paying for it. Because I think they seriously overestimated their worth here.
Last edited by StyleTime on Oct 16th, 2021 at 07:39 PM
So Game Pass is $12 a month.....About $150 a year...so that's 3 times the price of N65/Genesis, NES and SNES games.......
But we are talking about a lot of brand new games, older AAA titles in the last 5 years and probably around 200+ titles...and new games are being released every so couple of weeks.....there should twice the amount of tiles available for N64 and Genesis.....I still think the service is a wasted oppertunity...
There should 3 times the amount of games on there considering we are now talking titles released when I was in high school 20+ years ago. And games released when I was in primary school.
Gender: Male Location: In Luna's mane, chasing STAAARS!
If you're in it for the N64 half mainly and you more than likely are, this is a scam if the Switch's NES/SNES library is anything to prove with how limited and how few updates it's had over the years. What were they thinking charging this much? I wanted Gamecube on Switch but now I'm scared to see the price for that.
I agree...I don't mind paying a bit of money for it but the updates were ****ing weak as shit......
NES Online had 3 games added this year....and one of them was Super Mario 3 Special Version.....just three games. And most of these games are shit...or super obscure.
SNES Online had 14 games....and most of them are shit still...games I have never heard of.
So N64 and Genesis...will probably get a very small amount and none of the non-Nintendo classics.
Which sucks because Nintendo has a huge possibility and they could release 100s of titles and people will adore the service and pay the yearly subscription for it.
In 1 month, at least 18 games were released on Game pass...including a couple of games day 1....if MS can release this amount of games on a service....i dont understand how Nintendo cannot do the same using games that are 30+ years old.
Yeah. For me and I guess most it would have to be a very specific N64 game I would want to play online to justify paying that much more than the standard $20, even if just temporarily. Something like Diddy Kong Racing in my case or Goldeneye if there was a way to get it out of licensing hell. Wouldn't sub to the new plan just to generically experience Super Mario 64 and such again.
Even if you took the argument/reason that the NSO price hike is huge due to the 3rd party licensing at face value, problem is, no one asked for Sega Genesis on NSO. They could've raised the price of the base plan by $10 or so for N64 and throw in Sega Genesis as a bonus with the increase and no one would've cared much. I guess it's possible that the reason for the big price increase is because of Sega but... Nintendo chose to pair up N64 with the Genesis. I'm not against the Genesis being there but before we had it revealed, people were only asking about either N64 or Game Boy stuff. Maybe Nintendo didn't see Game Boy libraries as profitable enough for the service due to severe lack of online play integration that they could add.
I don't know, but as mentioned I don't even want to imagine how much more Nintendo would charge if they added Gamecube games and maybe another Sega library as a side deal. It's already $50 for just Genesis and 64. And I'm not talking about for just the Switch, but Nintendo's plans long term. These online subscription deals aren't ending with the Switch. The days of Virtual Console are long gone and never coming back. Virtual Consoles had diminishing returns, and they see the Netflix style way of cataloguing older games as more profitable now.
I'm still remembering how pretty much everyone forgot how the Switch had free online for awhile in the first few months and when we started paying for it, literally nothing about the online functions itself changed. Like fundamentally it was the same online that we got for free, just now we were paying for it, and now they have the balls to try and charge us even more for a bunch of roms, without fixing their online itself. $20 for S/NES games is fine as a bonus, but we were still paying for an online that did not have any real improvements or changes from when we were playing it for free, and that's the problem.
At least when Microsoft started (or rather, popularized) the paid online trend, it was back when the internet was still a luxury for most rather than a lifestyle, and it was good quality online for what you paid for, when the concept of online gaming was still a novelty. It took awhile for for Playstation's network to catch up to Xbox Live, which it then similarly became a paid service by the time it did. But Nintendo started charging money for online play without really improving their online itself, which is ass backwards. I know that any progress they make in something like the online department tends to be in baby steps, but how they push people's patience with that while also charging more and more for roms that we'll never get to own permanently like under the Virtual Console system is aggravating.
Paying to play online is a relic that only still exists because capitalism, but at least with Sony and Microsoft you get what you pay for; quality online on their service. Except for the occasional times where Nintendo had a dud, I've always still liked them the best just as far as their brand, which is why it hurts that their online's still as bad as it is.
Compared to Microsoft when they tried doubling the price of XBL not too long ago, Nintendo has enough asskissers that will pay their $50 for a small selection of N64/Genesis titles. I just hope there's as many people that own a Switch if not more that'll resist paying it though, and that the backlash is long lasting.
For comparison's sake, the most comparable service to this new "upgrade" is PSNow pricewise. You pay 60$ annually...except you get PS2, PS3, even PS4 games, with some hints that PS5 games will soon be available too. Indies, AAA titles, and everything in between. 700+ titles with more added monthly. Nintendo is asking us to pay a similar price for only N64 and Genesis games.
Their one argument is that the actual Switch online service is bundled in(20$ base), so you're "technically" only paying 30$ for the N64/Genesis collections...
but even 30$ is too much for that quite frankly. N64/Genesis games shouldn't be 50% of the price of all those modern titles on PSNow. I'd still expect Gamecube, GBA, or DS titles in there somewhere. I mean, we're talking 30 year old games here, most of which I don't care about playing anyway. I might consider 10-15$.
Last edited by StyleTime on Oct 17th, 2021 at 02:03 AM
And most of these games have been re-released for years....like Super Mario 64.
Like we should be getting 100 of the best N64 games out there....like Wave Race!!
One thing not mentioned about Xbox Live and then eventually PS (whatever its called) is that you it's super simple to party up and play. It's not just the quality of the online network but the idea that every MP game was tied to Xbox Live and generally functioned the same way.
It's one of the reasons why 360 games are still playable online through backwards compatibility. My friend and I are playing through Dead Space 3 Co-Op, and that was a title that used the online pass system that was a thing years ago.....
KMC Community Forums
Jul 14th, 2021 07:28 AM
Thanks Scribble!
Key point being it comes with Nintendo Switch Online.
