|
Are you getting the Wii U? This poll is closed. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| Yes |
|
9031 | 65.25% |
| No |
|
1191 | 8.60% |
| Maybe |
|
808 | 5.84% |
| I'm an idiot |
|
460 | 3.32% |
| Waluigi |
|
1603 | 11.58% |
| Waa |
|
748 | 5.40% |
| Total: | 13841 votes | ||
|
Also the way I see it, I can pay a few bucks to just get my favorites on the Wii U's menu with new features and still have my entire back catalog a couple buttons buried. The ones a pay a little extra for have a convenience bonus, and the ones I dont have an extremely slight convenience decrease since I have to hit that extra button to get into Wii mode. Overall it evens out.
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2013 03:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 10:22 |
|
|
ghostwritingduck posted:The more apt analogy would be getting mad that you had to buy all of your apps over again when you buy a new iphone, iPhone, ipad, or android device... Nope, none of those are right. You're paying for an upgraded version that takes advantage of new features available on your new phone. The old versions of the app works just fine.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2013 03:31
|
|
|
kirbysuperstar posted:Right, like customizing controls, off-screen play, that sort of thing. Edit: Keep in mind, in this question, they've already made it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2013 03:31
|
|
|
I've lost track. Are people upset that the transfer method is clunky since the Wii had no account system, or do people not realize there is a transfer method and a Wii-mode and think they must repurchase VC games? e: because a lot of these analogies seem to involve "like if Steam made you rebuy it!"
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2013 03:33
|
|
|
LividLiquid posted:Or would you just expect them to include it with a firmware update at no charge? I wouldn't expect it to happen because 1. It's Nintendo 2. That's absolutely stupid and there's no way for Wiimote pointer functionality to work on the gamepad screen, short of taping IR lights to the top of it and sitting a foot back.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2013 03:35
|
|
|
LividLiquid posted:Is this just a digital thing for you? Is that the barrier here? Like, if Nintendo made a Wii mode that allowed off-screen play, would you expect to pay another dollar to play Smash Brothers on it, then another dollar for Twilight Princess, then another dollar for Mario Galaxy? Or would you just expect them to include it with a firmware update at no charge? Not only are they re-developing the emulator to run on different hardware per game (this is not simple or easy) They're also including features that didn't exist in the old VC titles. Further, your old VC content is still 100% available. You just seem upset that you're being charged for the iPad version of your iPhone app. (which can be a thing)
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2013 03:35
|
|
|
The games still work. You pay $1-$1.50 for new features that weren't there before. This should also not be described as a "repurchase" without also using the phrase "80% discount".
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2013 03:35
|
|
|
Rawrbomb posted:Nope, none of those are right. I probably shouldn't have posted without first hand experience. I've been checking this thread because my son said he wanted the new Pikmin and I wanted to see what people thought, not knowing it was delayed. How are the games upgraded? My comment was referring more to Nintendo not having cloud purchases, than anything specifically WiiU. I had heard hints that this was changing though.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2013 03:39
|
|
|
Soul Glo posted:What I think is laughable is that they are charging more for SNES games versus NES games, which just reeks of literally nickel-and-dime'ing diehard fans who probably have bought that game multiple times over already. I think it makes more sense to charge more for SNES games than NES games in most cases, but I get what you're saying. The issue about "rebuying stuff on a Nintendo console" was actually handled rather well for the 3DS, all things considered (for Nintendo). I like the fact that you can transfer DSiware to the 3DS. That's the sort of product continuity that helps establish additional confidence in a platform for players interested in moving onward and upward. At the same time, it's proven to be a fairly non-essential thing for Nintendo to even worry about, as far as their digital purchases are concerned. They essentially don't have a proper account system for any of their systems other than the Wii U, and yet people continue to buy stuff on them, and Virtual Console games likely have been repurchased by people fairly often. People are using the current transfer system right now! They do run the risk of pissing off loyal fans through nickel and diming on VC games, but they honestly don't care. VC has been a joke since it was first introduced on the Wii, and it's hard to see a future where this isn't the case. They got people worked up over the idea that a Wii was going to be this historical gaming hub that called in games from everywhere in history, but they failed to support it in a way that I feel the concept really deserved, and continue to do so. In a lot of ways, VC is a lot like Backwards Compatibility: for the people who care, it's essential. For the people Nintendo wants to buy the system, at best it's a nicety. Nintendo knows that most of the people who care about VC will rebuy/pay the transfer costs willingly. Nintendo knows they can charge whatever arbitrary amount over perceived costs just to get your Wii VC stuff onto the Wii U because people are paying the costs, and some folks are so happy to pay more money for the same game again they'll even insult you for feeling that this set up kinda sucks and is taking advantage of the consumer. In an ideal world, Nintendo would have set up a proper account system with the Wii and the DSi, and we'd be allowed to download games we already purchased digitally onto our new hardware at no extra cost. Supercar Gautier posted:The emulators needed to be redone and the games all need a fresh round of QA, dude. I'm okay with Nintendo deciding to cover that cost with a dollar fee. This is like charging for a software patch that adds functionality to one title at a time. Nintendo is hardly hurting for cash, as gets repeated every time someone brings up NINTENDO IS DOOOOOOOMED. Nickel and diming their consumers for basic functionality of old purchases to be properly transferred to new hardware is greed at work.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2013 03:39
|
|
|
Rawrbomb posted:Not only are they re-developing the emulator to run on different hardware per game (this is not simple or easy) But again, neither you nor anybody else has told me why it is a good thing that they're charging other than "Well they're putting work into putting the games on the WiiU." My entire argument rests on the fact that I believe these features should've been included in the three-hundred-goddam dollars I just spent, rather than future dollars I don't believe I should have to spend. The entire other side of this argument sounds to me not like, "Buyer beware. It sucks, but that's how it is." but like "It's better for all of us that they're doing this.", which sounds a hell of a lot like stockholm syndrome to me. Edit: There are people who have said that Nintendo is charging the extra money because they can, and that's why they're doing it. I want to be very clear here. I'm agreeing with those people. I am also saying that it's a dick move, and I wish they hadn't gone that way.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2013 03:41
|
|
|
LividLiquid posted:But again, neither you nor anybody else has told me why it is a good thing that they're charging other than "Well they're putting work into putting the games on the WiiU." My entire argument rests on the fact that I believe these features should've been included in the three-hundred-goddam dollars I just spent, rather than future dollars I don't believe I should have to spend. Nobody said it was a "good thing", just that it's not as "rear end fuckingly awful" as you're making it out to be.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2013 03:42
|
|
|
ghostwritingduck posted:I probably shouldn't have posted without first hand experience. I've been checking this thread because my son said he wanted the new Pikmin and I wanted to see what people thought, not knowing it was delayed. Once the wii transfer is complete, your Wii Purchases are linked to your Nintendo Network account. If they release a VC title that you had on your Wii purchase history, it should be discounted from the full price, to 1 dollar or 1.5 dollars depending on what title it was. So, for example, Super Mario World. I own it on my Wii, I've transferred it to my Wii U during the system transfer. If I were to buy the Super Mario World again on my Wii U for the VC, I'd get it for 1.50, and have the new features. I'd also still have the Wii version, in Wii Mode. So, if I never buy the upgrade, I can still play it on Wii Mode on my Wii U. If I buy the upgrade, I can play it without Wii mode. Edit: LividLiquid posted:Firstly, why are they making a different emulator for every game? Second, the features of my new phones can apply to my old phone software without having to re-buy the software, so that's already a thing. Thirdly, my VC content may be available, but is not playable on the system's built-in screen. Do you understand how complicated the Super Nintendo hardware is? Each cart could have custom hardware that further enhanced the SNES itself. They more than likely have a single basic emulator software, that is then customized and enhanced for each game using "hacks" to get around hardware specific stuff that is just impossible to emulate. They're not charging you a drat THING, if you just want to play the software on your Wii U, you just have to use Wii Mode. Rawrbomb fucked around with this message at 03:45 on Mar 8, 2013 |
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2013 03:43
|
|
|
LividLiquid posted:But again, neither you nor anybody else has told me why it is a good thing that they're charging other than "Well they're putting work into putting the games on the WiiU." My entire argument rests on the fact that I believe these features should've been included in the three-hundred-goddam dollars I just spent, rather than future dollars I don't believe I should have to spend. It's not better this way, it is, in some capacity, reasonable this way. If these feature upgrades were free that would be great! But there is seriously no reason to get angry that you have to pay for new features. Having to pay on a per-game basis warrants a little more consideration. Is that reasonable? It depends on the person. Comparing it to other companies in different situations isn't very apt, though. Just because one person does something for free doesn't mean you're really in a position to throw a fit if someone else doesn't. Nintendo would have more business considering adopting that plan if the company doing it was competing with them, like if Sony or Microsoft allowed old digital downloads to be played with new features for free. I think the Vita even does this? If Sony continues that trend Nintendo might want to consider changing how it works, but they aren't really obligated to.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2013 03:45
|
|
|
kirbysuperstar posted:Nobody said it was a "good thing", just that it's not as "rear end fuckingly awful" as you're making it out to be. I'll be the first to admit that I'm getting a bit worked up, but it's not about Nintendo's policies so much as it's the repeated attempts to defend what is obviously a greed-based decision as if it isn't one. As I've said several times, were the response, "Yeah. It sucks. But whaddaya'gonna'do?" I wouldn't have engaged to begin with. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2013 03:47
|
|
|
LividLiquid posted:So you've spent this long trying to tell me that I'm a little too upset about this for your tastes, rather than coming right out and saying that? I've barely told you anything. Would you like me to tell you you're entitled? Would that make you feel better?
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2013 03:49
|
|
|
I remember when Serious Sam was re-released, and Steam owners didn't get a copy of the new, more-expension version automatically. Nobody was acting upset about it, because it would be dumb to expect it. I didn't get a free copy of Baldur's Gate either, when that re-released, despite owning that and its sequels. Nobody complained. Perhaps it would help some people to think of the VC upgrade as $1 DLC instead of an assfucking? $1 DLC that mysteriously comes with an extra copy of the original title for no discernable reason. That sounds pretty good.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2013 03:50
|
|
|
LividLiquid posted:The entire other side of this argument sounds to me not like, "Buyer beware. It sucks, but that's how it is." but like "It's better for all of us that they're doing this.", which sounds a hell of a lot like stockholm syndrome to me. In a lot of ways, Buyer Beware is really the only thing to say about Nintendo's e-shop (and now Sony's PSN, with the recent announcement that a vast majority of PS3 PSN purchases will not be available on PS4). This is the sort of thing that can hurt confidence in a given platform, but again, neither Sony or Nintendo really see the need to give a poo poo though. They're going to make a lot more money off of new games for the new platform than they will off of classics downloads, so that's going to be their focus. Rawrbomb posted:Do you understand how complicated the Super Nintendo hardware is? Each cart could have custom hardware that further enhanced the SNES itself. They are charging you a convenience fee, essentially, just so you can avoid dealing with the Wii U's OS (is it still pretty slow these days?) an extra step to play a game you already own. While I'm sure we could go on and on about the complexities of emulating an SNES game, there's still no reason why previously purchased VC games HAVE to be played in Wii Mode unless you pay the convenience fee. The fact remains that they have managed to monetize games people have already purchased just for functionality that should really already be present on the system as is.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2013 03:53
|
|
|
Raizor posted:Nintendo would have more business considering adopting that plan if the company doing it was competing with them, like if Sony or Microsoft allowed old digital downloads to be played with new features for free. I think the Vita even does this? If Sony continues that trend Nintendo might want to consider changing how it works, but they aren't really obligated to. The Vita, like PSP and PS3, can play most of the PSOne Classics library and you can utilize a bunch of new features like control configuration (buttons, touch screen, back panel) and adjust Vita-based graphics settings for free.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2013 03:54
|
|
|
LividLiquid posted:So you've spent this long trying to tell me that I'm a little too upset about this for your tastes, rather than coming right out and saying that? It isn't greed based in the least. It takes time and effort to redevelop the emulator for the specific game. It takes time and effort to QA this redeveloped version to certify it to ship. These are things that cost real money. fivegears4reverse posted:They are charging you a convenience fee, essentially, just so you can avoid dealing with the Wii U's OS (is it still pretty slow these days?) an extra step to play a game you already own. See above, they're making us pay again because it costs time and money to redo the games for the Wii U's different hardware.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2013 03:54
|
|
|
fivegears4reverse posted:the Wii U's OS (is it still pretty slow these days?) Yeah it's still pretty horrid. I think the patch due in April will be helping things? Or was that the VC rollout. poo poo, I dunno.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2013 03:55
|
|
|
LividLiquid posted:So you've spent this long trying to tell me that I'm a little too upset about this for your tastes, rather than coming right out and saying that? I dont' think anyone here sucked Nintendo off over it's policies. The general answer to your self admitted over reaction was "They put work in and they're a business." is it a little nickel and dimey, sure it is but it's not a BIG loving DEAL. If they took away functionality THEN i'd understand the anger but no, you're just being flippant for the sake of making people jump through hoops you wanna hear.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2013 03:55
|
|
|
Rawrbomb posted:See above, they're making us pay again because it costs time and money to redo the games for the Wii U's different hardware. See directly above this post: The Vita, a system that is inarguably in worse shape than any Nintendo platform available right now, lets you take advantage of new software emulation features and free and easy transfers of PSOne classics and digital PSP games without charging an additional fee.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2013 04:00
|
|
|
Policenaut posted:The Vita, like PSP and PS3, can play most of the PSOne Classics library and you can utilize a bunch of new features like control configuration (buttons, touch screen, back panel) and adjust Vita-based graphics settings for free. Sony also ate a $200 hit just to convince you to buy the PS3. Recently, Electronic Arts accidentally made every nonlicensed (e.g. not Star Wars) title under $20 free on Origin for a day -- then let everybody keep the games. Sometimes, for a weak or unproven platform, it's worth it to hand goodies out to increase your install base and build loyalty. When Nintendo dropped the 3DS price amid a shakey start, they gave a pile of games to anybody who already had one or would soon be getting one, for similar reasons. They were crazy enough to even say those games might remain exclusive to really swing it, even though a lot of those titles (like Yoshi's Island) would sell gangbusters if properly released. Companies do silly things sometimes in the name of business, and people are getting upset that Nintendo isn't doing a silly thing for them.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2013 04:04
|
|
|
Rawrbomb posted:Nope, none of those are right. Actually, that's exactly how iPhone apps work. I didn't have to rebuy apps when I transferred them to my iPhone 4S and they had versions that took advantage of the Retina display or Siri. So, yeah. That one is very right.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2013 04:06
|
|
|
Rawrbomb posted:See above, they're making us pay again because it costs time and money to redo the games for the Wii U's different hardware. I'd be fine if I could just boot into Wii mode from the screen so I could play my old VC games. No additional emulation would be required for this. The ports have already been made. No new QA. No new features. Nothing new required beyond one unifying feature that would allow all of this to take place. Then maybe they could ALSO do what they're doing, and charge for specialized WiiU versions of the same software with the new features. That'd be win/win. As it stands, they're giving me features I'm not asking for, not including an obvious one that everybody wants, and calling it a day.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2013 04:14
|
|
|
LividLiquid posted:And again, my point is that at three hundred dollars, I feel that letting me play things I already own on the system's primary selling point (its screen) should be included. I don't feel that's something silly for the company to do, nor do I feel it's unreasonable. Really we should just be grateful they aren't going to charge us consumers for the upcoming patch that unfucks the Wii U's OS. That took time, money and effort to screw up in the first place and it definitely is taking time, money, and effort to fix.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2013 04:23
|
|
|
It's been awhile since I've bought anything on the virtual console (like not since the original Wii released), but the $1.00 and $1.50 charges sound like they should be the price for the games, not for their updates. Is Nintendo still charging $5 and $8 for NES and SNES games respectively? If that's the case, they can promptly get hosed. I'm not spending that kind of money on 20+ year old games. How do they justify that when I can purchase PSone games that are orders of magnitude larger in size for $3-5?
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2013 05:04
|
|
|
Almost Smart posted:How do they justify that when I can purchase PSone games that are orders of magnitude larger in size for $3-5? Because everyone knows file size is directly correlated with how good a game is. (not to say the vast majority of (S)NES games were good, I'm well aware they were not)
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2013 05:15
|
|
|
ghostwritingduck posted:I grew up playing Nintendo games, and I can't imagine not playing Nintendo games, but they are lagging behind the competition in things that consumers are starting to expect. Which competition? The next Sony console isn't backwards compatible and they said PSN purchases will not carry forward.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2013 05:50
|
|
|
absolutely anything posted:Oh, is it from the Wii U side? I could have sworn it was from the Wii's. Oh well, I did it way back on launch day so I'm not surprised I forgot. I don't know what you're talking about, I don't see any feature to do this on either side. I think you did it through the system transfer. Rawrbomb posted:Nope, none of those are right. The PSVita upscales your previously owned PSP games, adds second stick functionality to PSP games and PS1 games, and analogue control to PS1 games. kirbysuperstar posted:there's no way for Wiimote pointer functionality to work on the gamepad screen, short of taping IR lights to the top of it and sitting a foot back. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2013 05:58
|
|
|
Artix posted:Because everyone knows file size is directly correlated with how good a game is. (not to say the vast majority of (S)NES games were good, I'm well aware they were not) Hell, since some folks have been throwing around justifications to defend Nintendo's practices with handling digital content, the prices for more expensive content on PSN IS because the file size is bigger. We're covering bandwidth costs on top of the value of the games themselves  Reality is that Sony AND Nintendo are charging what they know they can get away with. Nintendo knows they can get away with charging a convenience fee on individual game patches for what will eventually become a standard on their system for old VC content, and some folks here are totally comfortable defending that.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2013 06:29
|
|
|
Since we enjoy beating dead horses: Ubisoft wants a Wii U price cut The writer's headline is a little misleading *games journalism*, but I still find it hilarious that someone at Ubisoft made these comments after the Rayman situation.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2013 06:31
|
|
|
kirbysuperstar posted:2. That's absolutely stupid and there's no way for Wiimote pointer functionality to work on the gamepad screen, short of taping IR lights to the top of it and sitting a foot back. Yeah, there's no way for it to be done.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2013 06:41
|
|
|
Edit: Wow, beaten by MINUTES!
Gutcruncher fucked around with this message at 07:16 on Mar 8, 2013 |
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2013 06:45
|
|
|
Right, I may have forgotten that it had IRs in the pad itself. Still, would you want to actually do that? Classic Controller games would probably be fine, but using a Wiimote on it sounds absolutely awful. I'll totally eat my hat if Nintendo makes vWii mode playable on the pad, though.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2013 06:50
|
|
|
Sire Oblivion posted:Yeah, there's no way for it to be done. This is ridiculously cool and makes me wish there was a real portable Wii that was essentially a Gamepad with a Wii stuck in it. Portable Xenoblade. I'd buy one so fast 
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2013 06:53
|
|
|
I'm now coming back towards the middle on this argument. Regardless of what work has to go into programming a new emulator, they're still selling the games at ridiculous price points to begin with, so the 'update' price just doesn't seem like a necessary construct. It has a legitimate justification, but at the same time, Nintendo has to realize that they're competing with Free, and maybe for once they should try to do a better job of it? The original VC emulators should have had save states and button re-mapping in the first place. Why were they so phoned in? Their work is done in by the amenities offered by dozens of free emulators that have existed for years, as well as the ability for anyone to gain access to their entire back catalog with a single google search. Steam publishers learned to fight piracy with great values. Why can't the VC pricing be more competitive?
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2013 06:53
|
|
|
The "I paid THREE HUNDRED DOLLARS" argument is oddball when we know that's slightly less than the manufacturing cost of the hardware. It's basically saying "I want this to be part of what I paid for" after the fact. It's rather arbitrary to say that VC upgrades are supposed to be part of that cost while other elements are not supposed to be.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2013 07:12
|
|
|
AngryCaterpillar posted:I don't know what you're talking about, I don't see any feature to do this on either side. I think you did it through the system transfer. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2013 07:24
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 10:22 |
|
|
Almost Smart posted:It's been awhile since I've bought anything on the virtual console (like not since the original Wii released), but the $1.00 and $1.50 charges sound like they should be the price for the games, not for their updates. Is Nintendo still charging $5 and $8 for NES and SNES games respectively? If that's the case, they can promptly get hosed. I'm not spending that kind of money on 20+ year old games. How do they justify that when I can purchase PSone games that are orders of magnitude larger in size for $3-5? Companies do not set prices based on what you, personally, feel they are worth, but rather the price where they believe they'll make the most money. If something costs more than you think it is worth and it is not a necessity (ie food, water, oil), the correct response is to not purchase the item. There is nothing unethical about a company pricing something for more than you think the item is worth. If you have a way of explaining why doing so is unethical, I'd be delighted to hear it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2013 07:32
|
|
