Nintendo going to start charging for online play

Artcile

Nintendo To Begin Charging Money For Some Online Gaming

Nintendo's Wi-Fi Connection service has always been entirely free of charge, but the company will soon introduce a pay-to-play service for some games, it announced at Game Developers Conference.

"Nintendo Wi-Fi Connection Pay And Play" will let users subscribe on a game-by-game basis to certain titles. Nintendo project leader Takashi Aoyama announced the service at GDC, but did not say what upcoming games would require payment for the service, or how much they would cost.

To avoid customer confusion, Pay-And-Play games will have a red icon on the game's box that reads Pay And Play, in place of the traditional blue Wi-Fi Connection icon, which will only be used for games that are free to play.

This is a pretty big change for Nintendo, who has always been adamant about wanting online gameplay to be free. While this might attract more developers to the service with a new revenue stream, it also might confuse consumers -- and be a hassle if the payment system isn't easy. You'll use Wii Points to pay for the online gaming, so it should be interesting to see if this extends to the DS Lite or if it's just restricted to Wii.

I don't know if this is new news to any of you, but this is big to me. Hopefully if they start charging for every game they implement more features, like vocie chat and no FC's, but we'll just have to wait and see how this plays out

Hopefully this means that they'll add features like chat so everyone who complained about it just have to open their wallet to have it.

Thank GOD no more threads about it lol

If they are going to charge for online they cant screw us anymore. It has to be a damn good service now not what they have been doing.Cyber-

Yep, when you offer a service for free, customer complaints can only go so far. But when customers are actually paying for a service, they can complain by not buying it or cancelling their subscription if it doesn't meet expectations. This acts as a much better indicator of quality and customer satisfaction.

As much as I don't want to pay for online gaming, I have a feeling that Nintendo has deemed it absolutely necessary in some circumstances. They've been claiming for years that they won't make Nintendo customers pay for online services. That's why the Gamecube didn't have any kind of substantial online offering - Nintendo didn't think consumers in general were willing to pay to play, even though other games and services proved otherwise.

I just hope that publishers don't start taking advantage of this by requiring payment for services that they would've offered for free at the same level of quality.

Even more interesting from that link is confirmation of DLC for the Wii. Although it'll be placed entirely in the hands of developers/publishers, it's better than nothing.

Hopefully this means that they'll add features like chat so everyone who complained about it just have to open their wallet to have it.

Thank GOD no more threads about it lol

Jaysonguy

Link.

During a Game Developers Conference session called "Planning the Wii Menu" today, Nintendo's Takashi Aoyama announced a new Pay to Play program. This will be a new version of the Nintendo Wi-Fi Connection (NWFC). Aoyama explained that NWFC will remain a free service, but forthcoming experiences will require users to pay a fee to enjoy. These services will fall under the new NWFC: Pay to Play program. Games that utilize the new service will feature a logo similar to the one used for NWFC but is orange and reads Pay to Play at the bottom.

The online is still free. You just pay if you want extra content. You people are tripping for nothing.

Link.

During a Game Developers Conference session called "Planning the Wii Menu" today, Nintendo's Takashi Aoyama announced a new Pay to Play program. This will be a new version of the Nintendo Wi-Fi Connection (NWFC). Aoyama explained that NWFC will remain a free service, but forthcoming experiences will require users to pay a fee to enjoy. These services will fall under the new NWFC: Pay to Play program. Games that utilize the new service will feature a logo similar to the one used for NWFC but is orange and reads Pay to Play at the bottom.

The online is still free. You just pay if you want extra content. You people are tripping for nothing.

m_machine024

Thank goodness for reading comprehension! These threads make me fear the fate of humanity.

[QUOTE="Cyber-"]If they are going to charge for online they cant screw us anymore. It has to be a damn good service now not what they have been doing.JordanElek

Yep, when you offer a service for free, customer complaints can only go so far. But when customers are actually paying for a service, they can complain by not buying it or cancelling their subscription if it doesn't meet expectations. This acts as a much better indicator of quality and customer satisfaction.

As much as I don't want to pay for online gaming, I have a feeling that Nintendo has deemed it absolutely necessary in some circumstances. They've been claiming for years that they won't make Nintendo customers pay for online services. That's why the Gamecube didn't have any kind of substantial online offering - Nintendo didn't think consumers in general were willing to pay to play, even though other games and services proved otherwise.

I just hope that publishers don't start taking advantage of this by requiring payment for services that they would've offered for free at the same level of quality.

Even more interesting from that link is confirmation of DLC for the Wii. Although it'll be placed entirely in the hands of developers/publishers, it's better than nothing.

But in order for this to be worth it they really have to push the service they need to make it so even old games improve. Meaning you are gonna go through a game like Mario Strikers virtually lag free while other people still have to struggle with the lag.

But in order for this to be worth it they really have to push the service they need to make it so even old games improve. Meaning you are gonna go through a game like Mario Strikers virtually lag free while other people still have to struggle with the lag.Cyber-

Well according to this article, only certain online experiences are going to require payment. I think the majority of Nintendo's own games will probably remain free; they're simply offering this as an option for developers who otherwise couldn't afford to put a game online.

So it won't affect the online quality of games that are already released. Nintendo isn't announcing a blanket charge on all online connections via the Wii ala Xbox Live; pay to play will only be for certain online games yet to be released.

One word "GREED".

Nintendo, from day 1 was making a profit on Wii sales. They have money to burn. they can afford to provide a free service. Guys, just because you don't like friend codes and the crappy online that is currently provided doesn't mean you have to pay for it. Nintendo can easily send an update an fix this for free. They are trying to charge now because they think they could do that and you will accept it.Judging from the posts, you guys are willing to bend over, so they are right.

[QUOTE="Cyber-"]But in order for this to be worth it they really have to push the service they need to make it so even old games improve. Meaning you are gonna go through a game like Mario Strikers virtually lag free while other people still have to struggle with the lag.JordanElek

Well according to this article, only certain online experiences are going to require payment. I think the majority of Nintendo's own games will probably remain free; they're simply offering this as an option for developers who otherwise couldn't afford to put a game online.

So it won't affect the online quality of games that are already released. Nintendo isn't announcing a blanket charge on all online connections via the Wii ala Xbox Live; pay to play will only be for certain online games yet to be released.

ya but it would be lame if we were paying for a service and then still had to deal with those other games.

If we have to pay seperately for each game this will suck. If they screw this up its going to be detrimental.

One word "GREED".

Nintendo, from day 1 was making a profit on Wii sales. They have money to burn. they can afford to provide a free service. Guys, just because you don't like friend codes and the crappy online that is currently provided doesn't mean you have to pay for it. Nintendo can easily send an update an fix this for free. They are trying to charge now because they think they could do that and you will accept it.Judging from the posts, you guys are willing to bend over, so they are right.

pjoasil

Please read the information again

You don't seem to have a grasp of it.

Jordan does a nice job of summing it up, read his post a few times

It seems like they are going about this the wrong way.

If this is a service that encompasses all games then it would be worth it.

If this is just a pay per view sort of thing where each game has its own charge then this sucks.

It seems like they are going about this the wrong way.

If this is a service that encompasses all games then it would be worth it.

If this is just a pay per view sort of thing where each game has its own charge then this sucks.

Cyber-

Why?

Like Jordan says this is going to be set up so only certain games need it and users are going to see that up front when making a purchase.

I don't want to be charged money for something I wont be using. If they offer chat for pay I'll just leave it there so everyone who doesn't know how to use a phone can buy it. I wont be getting it.

I don't see what's wrong of the freedom of choice. The free service will still be there and you'll be able to upgrade for some games.

I'm not a huge online gamer, so this doesn't affect me much. hopefully they'll make some much needed improvements to their online structure.LOLhahaDEAD

Same for me. I want to play online SSBB, Mario Kart and Dr.Mario (wiiware) and that's it. As long I can do that, I will be ok.

I guess Nintendo isn't making enough money yet. They need more.zilcher

Name 1 company that doesn't like making money.

[QUOTE="Cyber-"]

It seems like they are going about this the wrong way.

If this is a service that encompasses all games then it would be worth it.

If this is just a pay per view sort of thing where each game has its own charge then this sucks.

Jaysonguy

Why?

Like Jordan says this is going to be set up so only certain games need it and users are going to see that up front when making a purchase.

I don't want to be charged money for something I wont be using. If they offer chat for pay I'll just leave it there so everyone who doesn't know how to use a phone can buy it. I wont be getting it.

I don't see what's wrong of the freedom of choice. The free service will still be there and you'll be able to upgrade for some games.

because i dont want to pay for seperate games if that is the case.

if its a service that includes certain paid games then Im ok with it, ideally I would want previous games to imrpove but thats just ideal.

[QUOTE="Cyber-"]

It seems like they are going about this the wrong way.

If this is a service that encompasses all games then it would be worth it.

If this is just a pay per view sort of thing where each game has its own charge then this sucks.

Jaysonguy

Why?

Like Jordan says this is going to be set up so only certain games need it and users are going to see that up front when making a purchase.

I don't want to be charged money for something I wont be using. If they offer chat for pay I'll just leave it there so everyone who doesn't know how to use a phone can buy it. I wont be getting it.

I don't see what's wrong of the freedom of choice. The free service will still be there and you'll be able to upgrade for some games.

If this is just a pay per view sort of thing where each game has its own charge then this sucks. Cyber-

At this point, that's what it is. The different red and blue labels are perfect examples of it.

Here's my take on why Nintendo is offering this. Even though I already mentioned it, I'll go into a little more detail.

People complain quite a bit about multiplatform games having online support for other consoles but not for the Wii. The most recent example, which might be baffling to some, is World Snooker Championship. Kind of an obscure example, but bear with me. The Wii version is going to ship with a billiard stick extension for the Wii remote, and it'll contain three times as many real-life characters as the other versions (96 as opposed to 32... quite a big deal). According to the developer and Gamespot, the Wii version is really the stand-out.

But it doesn't have an online mode. Maybe next year, they say. Take a look at the publisher and developer, and it'll make a bit more sense. They're not the biggest companies. My guess is that they simply can't afford to implement an online mode into the Wii version because of everything that entails. For the other consoles, they get some help from the console-makers; not so with the Wii, as far as I know (and I admit that I don't know as much about this as I'd like).

The option of charging for online play will help smaller developers provide online content. Nintendo is leaving it up to developers instead of taking it all into their own hands.

I agree that paying separately for every game would be a pain, but I don't think every game is going to require payment. And maybe some of them will only be a one-time optional fee, so if you want the game but not the online component, you don't have to pay extra.

In all honesty, if we're going to pay, I like the idea of one sweeping fee, paid to Nintendo, that covers all online expenses. We've seen it elsewhere, and it seems to work. But Nintendo is a different company with different goals, and that's probably not the best course of action for them. We'll just have to wait and see how this plays out, how developers take advantage of it, etc.

[QUOTE="zilcher"]I guess Nintendo isn't making enough money yet. They need more.chris3116

Name 1 company that doesn't like making money.

[QUOTE="Cyber-"]If this is just a pay per view sort of thing where each game has its own charge then this sucks. JordanElek

At this point, that's what it is. The different red and blue labels are perfect examples of it.

Here's my take on why Nintendo is offering this. Even though I already mentioned it, I'll go into a little more detail.

People complain quite a bit about multiplatform games having online support for other consoles but not for the Wii. The most recent example, which might be baffling to some, is World Snooker Championship. Kind of an obscure example, but bear with me. The Wii version is going to ship with a billiard stick extension for the Wii remote, and it'll contain three times as many real-life characters as the other versions (96 as opposed to 32... quite a big deal). According to the developer and Gamespot, the Wii version is really the stand-out.

But it doesn't have an online mode. Maybe next year, they say. Take a look at the publisher and developer, and it'll make a bit more sense. They're not the biggest companies. My guess is that they simply can't afford to implement an online mode into the Wii version because of everything that entails. For the other consoles, they get some help from the console-makers; not so with the Wii, as far as I know (and I admit that I don't know as much about this as I'd like).

The option of charging for online play will help smaller developers provide online content. Nintendo is leaving it up to developers instead of taking it all into their own hands.

I agree that paying separately for every game would be a pain, but I don't think every game is going to require payment. And maybe some of them will only be a one-time optional fee, so if you want the game but not the online component, you don't have to pay extra.

In all honesty, if we're going to pay, I like the idea of one sweeping fee, paid to Nintendo, that covers all online expenses. We've seen it elsewhere, and it seems to work. But Nintendo is a different company with different goals, and that's probably not the best course of action for them. We'll just have to wait and see how this plays out, how developers take advantage of it, etc.

While I agree with you comment, Jordan, but I believe this might not end up being the case. I have a bit of a funny feeling that big name game company's like EA and Activision will surely abuse this new feature. I can almost-guarantee that they will. That's where I stand on the issue. Unless that fee is for extra DLC, and not to play online, then I'm ok iwht it. But I don't want to pay play online. That's one of the reasons why I chose the Wii over the other consoles. I wouldn't have to worry about an online fee because I myself do not play online THAT much, but I go on from a decent amount of time.

[QUOTE="Cyber-"]If this is just a pay per view sort of thing where each game has its own charge then this sucks. JordanElek

At this point, that's what it is. The different red and blue labels are perfect examples of it.

Here's my take on why Nintendo is offering this. Even though I already mentioned it, I'll go into a little more detail.

People complain quite a bit about multiplatform games having online support for other consoles but not for the Wii. The most recent example, which might be baffling to some, is World Snooker Championship. Kind of an obscure example, but bear with me. The Wii version is going to ship with a billiard stick extension for the Wii remote, and it'll contain three times as many real-life characters as the other versions (96 as opposed to 32... quite a big deal). According to the developer and Gamespot, the Wii version is really the stand-out.

But it doesn't have an online mode. Maybe next year, they say. Take a look at the publisher and developer, and it'll make a bit more sense. They're not the biggest companies. My guess is that they simply can't afford to implement an online mode into the Wii version because of everything that entails. For the other consoles, they get some help from the console-makers; not so with the Wii, as far as I know (and I admit that I don't know as much about this as I'd like).

The option of charging for online play will help smaller developers provide online content. Nintendo is leaving it up to developers instead of taking it all into their own hands.

I agree that paying separately for every game would be a pain, but I don't think every game is going to require payment. And maybe some of them will only be a one-time optional fee, so if you want the game but not the online component, you don't have to pay extra.

In all honesty, if we're going to pay, I like the idea of one sweeping fee, paid to Nintendo, that covers all online expenses. We've seen it elsewhere, and it seems to work. But Nintendo is a different company with different goals, and that's probably not the best course of action for them. We'll just have to wait and see how this plays out, how developers take advantage of it, etc.

SO I guess we agree then. A sperate cost for each game is a bad idea. If Nintendo had a service its so much better. Its like everything they do in regards to interface is counteractive. Instead of having a VC channel they go backwards and have them separate, instead of a leaderboard channel they are making a sperpate channel just for Mario Kart and then another channel just for Wii Fit, and now they are charging for online which wouldnt even be bad but they are making it cost per game.

There is a difference between making a unique experience and an inconvenient;y different experience and that is what Nintendo is doing with their interface across the boards.

SO I guess we agree then. A sperate cost for each game is a bad idea.Cyber-

We kind of agree. ;)

I don't think charging separately is a bad idea. In fact, I have no idea if it's a good idea or not, in terms of both Nintendo and consumers.

I don't know enough about Nintendo's inner workings to determine if this is good for them or not. We have to assume it is, or at least Nintendo thinks so, otherwise they wouldn't have announced it.

As for consumers, it could be good in that it allows smaller developers to offer online play when they couldn't before, or it could be bad in that we get the same quality of online experience as before but with an added price tage.

It all depends on how it plays out, like I said. There's a possibility for this option to be taken advantage of, like icarus and I mentioned earlier, but hopefully Nintendo has some kind of safeguard to prevent that.

I think Jordan's assessment is probably the most likely scenario. I'm just thinking about how Worms: A Space Oddity would've been so much better with online pay. It's not the kind of game that's gonna sell systems on its own; only a certain demographic will buy the game. If that group wants to pay for online play for just that game, this all makes sense.

As far as DLC, this doesn't suggest that at all. The problem is still that Nintendo won't extend the memory capabilities via external memory. Playing online doesn't take that much of a chunk of memory, but 3-4 40MB WiiWare titles will. DLC doesn't make sense in the wake of WiiWare. Where are we gonna put all this stuff?

By doing this they will take one of their key principles and chuck it out the 100th floor window into a trash can at the bottom filled with the downfalls of every console ever made!:evil::cry::(Aventura54

If Nintendo starts charging for games they develop or publish, then you're exactly right. I don't think that will happen, though. Nintendo's sitting pretty on a giant pile of cash; they'll only charge if they absolutely have to. I think we'll see in the coming months that Nintendo still believes in free online gaming, but they understand that that isn't always possible for every developer.

:cry: :cry: NNNNNNNOOOOOOO!!!!!! please Nintendo don't do this!

if they do go ahead with this idea then hopefully you'll only have to pay for some games, OR just charge say, 500 wii points to get online with the game then make it so you don't have to keep on paying:)

Still a terrible idea though :cry: