I’m so confused… There are so many valid reasons to hate on Nintendo, but you guys come up with two that aren’t valid? Nintendo is the only one of the big three that genuinely innovates when it comes to console design. Rent seeking? They’re the only one of the big three that doesn’t try to lock you into a subscription for your games. Every game that they make for their console is still sold as a physical cartridge with the full game on it. Even their online services are the cheapest of the three.
They don’t innovate when it comes to games, sure, but that’s not what you folks were saying. Their games never go on sale and are overpriced, sure, but that’s not rent seeking. Like I said, there’s so much to dislike about Nintendo and how they run things, but the two examples here that seem to clearly resonate with people are just wrong, and I’m not sure why people are upvoting them. Maybe I’m missing something
What do you mean they don’t try to get you to get a subscription? You need a Nintendo subscription to do anything online so not sure how in a digital online age where everyone is connected you somehow managed to convince yourself Nintendo doesn’t try to lock you in to a subscription. That’s all they do with the switch like no ones having their friends over to play Mario kart they are going online. Console Internet subscriptions should die but consoles aren’t powerful enough I presume to host their own lobbies.
You’re right, they do go for an online subscription. I guess my distinction was that access to your games aren’t lost if you aren’t paying the subscription. However, I realize that they do that for access to the retro games, so I’ll retract the rent-seeking statement, they’ve definitely moved to having more rent-seeking behaviour. My use case of the Switch just doesn’t interact with it in any way. I play games in split screen or local wireless multiplayer, which doesn’t require a subscription.
I’m so confused… There are so many valid reasons to hate on Nintendo, but you guys come up with two that aren’t valid? Nintendo is the only one of the big three that genuinely innovates when it comes to console design. Rent seeking? They’re the only one of the big three that doesn’t try to lock you into a subscription for your games. Every game that they make for their console is still sold as a physical cartridge with the full game on it. Even their online services are the cheapest of the three.
They don’t innovate when it comes to games, sure, but that’s not what you folks were saying. Their games never go on sale and are overpriced, sure, but that’s not rent seeking. Like I said, there’s so much to dislike about Nintendo and how they run things, but the two examples here that seem to clearly resonate with people are just wrong, and I’m not sure why people are upvoting them. Maybe I’m missing something
What do you mean they don’t try to get you to get a subscription? You need a Nintendo subscription to do anything online so not sure how in a digital online age where everyone is connected you somehow managed to convince yourself Nintendo doesn’t try to lock you in to a subscription. That’s all they do with the switch like no ones having their friends over to play Mario kart they are going online. Console Internet subscriptions should die but consoles aren’t powerful enough I presume to host their own lobbies.
You’re right, they do go for an online subscription. I guess my distinction was that access to your games aren’t lost if you aren’t paying the subscription. However, I realize that they do that for access to the retro games, so I’ll retract the rent-seeking statement, they’ve definitely moved to having more rent-seeking behaviour. My use case of the Switch just doesn’t interact with it in any way. I play games in split screen or local wireless multiplayer, which doesn’t require a subscription.