Why not a Virtual Console subscription service?

by Ross Miller { Dec 5th 2006 at 2:27PM }

Regarding a recent post we made about Wii Virtual Console demos, Joystiq reader Jesse Morrison makes a great suggestion: why not offer a retro subscription service, a la GameTap?

The benefits. Nintendo would not have to worry about demos and, if they want to, still charge for original titles. By charging a monthly or annual fee and allow gamers to play as many titles as they want. They could even make a hierarchy of service plans where you can pay more if you would like to have many titles cached on your Wii at a time. Nintendo arguably has more potential than GameTap via its extensive back library and console integration, and since GameTap has managed to stay afloat, the business model has potential for profit.

Ownership. One mental stigma associated with subscription services is the feeling of ownership. As it stands with the current plan, however, we don't have full ownership. Each game is tied to the console itself, which limits you from

Bringing your games over to a friend's house
Retaining your game purchases in the event your Wii breaks
Transferring the titles over to the next generation Nintendo console

With a subscription service, you will only be penalized for the extra months you purchased, assuming the implemented system is still tied to the console.

Logistical issues. If Nintendo is worried about paying the IP owners of each title, how about set up a system based on the amount of downloads each title receives, as a percentage of the income earned from the subscription? Also, for those who have already purchased VC titles, why not offer them a discount or rebate via equivalent months of subscription? This, obviously, is where our proposal gets a little muddy.

Non-competition. By merit of console-specific Friend Codes, Nintendo has positioned itself not to follow in the footsteps of its predecessors -- namely Microsoft's Xbox Live. So why appear as an inferior version when Nintendo can provide a new way of handling online console services that can be touted as innovative (in the realm of consoles)?

Why it will never work. By selling games a la carte, the big N is likely poised to make more money by charging a good price for individual games of Console's Past. But how will long-term customer satisfaction fare if more than a few downloads turn out to be nowhere near as fun as one expects or remembers?

We are but simple-minded blogging folk making suggestions for the sake of opening discussion on the matter, so please critique and discuss away.

[Thanks for the idea, Jesse!]

Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)

Dave @ Dec 5th 2006 3:13PM

The console is relatively cheap, but the VC games is where they getcha!

Raquor @ Dec 5th 2006 3:13PM

How about no subscription service simply because I have no desire to play every old retro game out there. There are a select few I might play but I bought the Wii primarily to play Wii games...not retro games. Those are just a nice perk/side benefit.

Do it! @ Dec 5th 2006 6:30PM

Do it!

CakeOrDeath @ Dec 13th 2006 3:12PM

"a few downloads turn out to be nowhere near as fun as one expects or remembers?"

Is this not the same problem you have when buying a new game?

That's what reviews are for!

Miniboss @ Dec 5th 2006 2:41PM

I think a subscription model would be nice. I mean, I'd certainly sign up for it, but I don't necessarily require it for me to get my enjoyment out of the Virtual Console. I'm sure the Big N has considered this option, and they might end up adding this service in the future. They might have to put a fair amount of restrictions on it though (even moreso than what the current VC downloads have), but they'd certainly be making less money off of subscriptions than they would straight purchases of individual titles.

Saneless @ Dec 5th 2006 2:41PM

Nintendo would surely be smart to do a subscription for the NES games and such.

Let's pretend I don't have emulation.. I'd like to play a lot of NES games, but at $5 a pop, I may buy maybe 2-5. If they're.. let's say, less fun than I remember, I may never buy another one ever again. $25 from me.

But let's say I'm on a 5.99 subscription or even 9.99. I might keep it for a year or even 6 months, netting Nintendo more money than they would've in the long run. Make it something like Live where it's $50 a year and they can almost guarantee people will get a year and keep it going as new games are released. This single purchase of 20-year-old game crap is going to only take them so far.

Chilli Con Carnage @ Dec 5th 2006 3:42PM

Its a great idea, but I could see people signing up for the subscription for 1 month, playing all their beloved classics to death and then just cancelling at the end of the month.

Perhaps a system where you pay per play with your Wii points like in the arcade?

Rzasa @ Dec 5th 2006 5:10PM

Sure, Nintendo could bring in more potential customers with a Gametap model, but does Nintendo really want that extra money? As crazy as that may sound, consider that Wii has already sold out two weeks after the US launch and one week after the Japanese launch, clearing just about one million units. The profit the needed to be made has been made. The Wii wasn't sold on the idea of a subscription service; we all knew coming in that VC games would be set a single purchase prices. So clearly that's not a significant problem for one million people.

Also, by switching to a Gametap or XBox Live-ish model, that takes away the whole point of the Wii: innovation. Nintendo could do what's be done before, but instead they went with simple, no commitment necessary purchases.

Vandor @ Dec 5th 2006 3:51PM

Isn't the problem with this model that not all the games are nintendo-games? Even the games from a nintendo-platform like NES or SNES aren't all Nintendo-owned. Nintendo makes them avaiable via VC, but doesn't most of the money from the purchase of a Bomberman-game go to Hudson and NOT to Nintendo? So how should a subscription-fee be distributed among all the publishers? By amount of games? By numbers of download?

Pince @ Dec 6th 2006 1:38AM

Decent idea but, at least right now, I don't see it as plausible.

The main reason is that, currently, they really don't have a lot of games available, so making them items for individual sale is smarter. Their business model incorporates a steady stream of new titles being added to the VC and I think a subscription-based service would be far more enticing in the future, once there are many more games to choose from.

The Pros and Cons of such a business model in the future can be argued 'til the ends of the earth, but I think that, for the time being, it is pretty clear that selling the downloads individually is a better way to go.

Nintendo is still just in the first couple weeks of a new online service, something they have not done before. Changes will be made as the service grows, and that will take time.

Erik Novak @ Dec 5th 2006 2:52PM

Nintendo won't do a subscription model because they are greedy. The overpricing of the Wii and countless years of overpricing their first party games (Mario 64 is still $30 for DS) show us that.

> @ Dec 5th 2006 2:54PM

As long as their loyal fanbots keep paying $5 for 20 year old games, Nintendo has zero reason to lower prices or do anything that will make less profit.

Even if uptake drops off, it doesnt matter; these downloads are 100% profit. They only need a handful of people to buy for them to make profit, the fanbots on Joystiq alone could sustain the VC service.

Oh, and 'Big N' may have been true 15 years ago.. now 'Last Place N' is more appropriate... when they sell 100+ million Wiis, they can call themselves 'Big N'.

GlitchCog @ Dec 5th 2006 2:55PM

The virtual console is the biggest disappointment for the Wii. They first announced it as some massive undertaking where you'd be able to get every NES/SNES/N64 game ever made. Some officials at Nintendo even said it might be a free service and that gamers from one region could download un-localized and unreleased games from other regions.

Based on these statements, I don't think it was unreasonable to imagine a long list to scroll through with all sorts of goodies to try out. Unreleased Mother localization? Doki Doki No Panic? Super Mario Kart, maybe with the online adapted to multiplayer? Hard to find carts like Paper Mario, Mario RPG or Earthbound? Hundreds more games just sitting up there to download and play. They could easily do it. They wouldn't be making money on it, but they wouldn't lose any either. What would it cost? A little bandwidth? Even if they cost a few dollars, at least they'd be there, and they'd make up enough in becoming the market leader for sure when every human being on the planet bought a Wii to play with the classics.

What do we get? A dozen NES games. FZero and Sim City. One N64 game. Every week four more? FOUR? We should already have all the first-party games up there. They should be announcing every week that they're making deals with SquareEnix for Dragon Warrior and Final Fantasy, or with Capcom for some Mega Man. That's what they should be announcing each week, not that they've benevolently decided to release Super Mario Bros.

It's really a slap in the face. I'm going to invest in some tools to play ROMs now.

crono141 @ Dec 5th 2006 3:51PM

I think if prices were lower, everybody and their brother would be buy VC games.

A subscription service is nice and all, but what about in 10 years, when they don't have the service anymore. All those games are gone.

crono141 @ Dec 5th 2006 3:54PM

>

Its still the "Big N" because their wallets are so much bigger than sony's could ever hope to be.

Here's to 18 billion in debt, and a nintendo net worth of 10.8 billion!

Troll.

Jeffler @ Dec 5th 2006 3:12PM

>, on your Big N statement, they're still the Big "N"! What, you're saying the N-Gage was better selling than the GBA or any Nintendo Product for that matter? Nintendo is still the big "N". Not the "big" N, but the big "N".

On this note though, nintendo wont do it because they go for the solution that gets them more money. This is also why they don't charge per game...you buy points. They don't care what you spend your points on...and they laugh when you buy them.

I have had 1200 points remaining for a few weeks now (i'm holding on to them until I find out if EA plays nice and allows NHL 94 for SNES or Genesis on the VC)

Dracula Jones @ Dec 5th 2006 3:11PM

I'm still waiting for games I actually would like to play again. I've purchased Sonic the Hedgehog (which plays better than I remember) and Super Mario 64 (which does not, but still holds up a decade later). I have no interest in anything else they have up there. And considering the vast combined catalogs of the NES, SNES, N64, Genesis and TG16, four new VC games a week is less than throwing us a bone.

My hopes for VC becoming a great service aren't yet dashed, but they are diminished.

Back to XBLA for now...

Ralph @ Dec 5th 2006 4:02PM

I thought I'd be all over the VC, but I haven't purchased a single Wii point. I'm not only disappointed by the lack of selection, but the price. It's hard to justify even $5 for the original LoZ. They've already paid for the R&D and have practically zero overhead in delivery. If they knocked all the prices down a couple of bucks....$2 for NES, $5 for SNES, $8 for everything enlse, it would make a HUGE difference.

mykie @ Dec 5th 2006 3:12PM

* Bringing your games over to a friend's house
True, but it's not like the Wii is any bigger than a couple of DVDs or a good book. Who's to say you can't just bring the Wii with you?

* Retaining your game purchases in the event your Wii breaks
Wrong, they're automatically registered to your My Nintendo account, and it's been previously said that you'll be able to redownload your games if your Wii breaks.

* Transferring the titles over to the next generation Nintendo console
Years off, and no one has said anything one way or another about this. No reason why you wouldn't be able to if your future console is tied to your My Nintendo account.

I'm a big supporter of subscription models like Gametap and Rhapsody. I love the consistent pricing of $10 a month for as much or as little content as I want.

But as previous subscription-based models have proven, it's not what most people want. People like to feel like they "own" their content (even if they don't), not like they're "renting" it. This is why iTunes dominates the online music business, and why Napster and Rhapsody had to adopt the Buy A Song model (while keeping the subscription models).

Another issue is self-inflicted dissatisfaction; People don't like the idea of downloading a ton of tracks/movies/games, only to have them disappear completely when their credit card is declined or they decide to cancel their subscription. Things like that don't set well with people, and they aren't likely to come back after that happens.

The current model is the safest bet for Virtual Console, and while it's not perfect, it's a lot easier to deal with from Nintendo's standpoint, than a subscription-based "rental" model.

BlindsideDork @ Dec 5th 2006 3:16PM

Um...there will be a Virtual Console demo sort of dilio. Here is the link:

http://www.cynamite.de/wii/news/more/enthuellt_wii_demos_als_download/80739/enthuellt_wii_demos_als_download.html

And translation: http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=132005

BPM? @ Dec 5th 2006 4:22PM

>, why do you always have to be rude in your posts?
First, with the "fanbots" comment. Is that really necessary?
Second, with the remark about the term "Big N." Regardless of numbers of systems sold, they're referred to as the "Big N" because they're the most known (or one of the most known") companies whose name starts with "N."

And, I agree with GlitchCog's statements. Virtual Console has been underwhelming so far. From the meager American lineup (whereas Japan gets heavy-hitters like SMB, LttP, and SFII from the start!) to the high pricetag (500 Points for an NES game is a bit much... And why do we have to pay 200 more points for Sega games than Japan)?

But one correction: It hasn't been stated it'll be four new games EVERY WEEK, just that is was four for this week. Upcoming weeks could have more, less, or the same amount of releases.

But Virtual Console is definitely falling short of its potential.

I've yet to even buy any Wii Points...

Rabish12 @ Dec 5th 2006 3:20PM

I don't care why they don't use a subscription-based model. I don't care that it's because of their own greed, and I don't care that subscription services would give me access to more games. I want to keep these games until my Wii breaks, and maybe even afterwards (as was mentioned, there are ways around such things), not for the half-decade that passes before Nintendo shuts down the service and takes my access to all those games with them.

typo @ Dec 5th 2006 5:21PM

As far as I know, while your VC downloads are currently tied to your Wii, they ARE also tied to an account. Nintendo has said that, in the event that a Wii crashes, they'll assist the customer in recovering the games. As far as I've heard, they also haven't stated that VC games won't be transferrable to their next console. In fact, some statements from NoJ execs suggested to me that once you've bought something on the VC, you've bought it "for good." Here's hoping.

I wouldn't mind a subscription service for the VC, but I don't really mind the current implementation. The prices are a little high, but not so high that I won't be snagging a handful of my favorites. I definitely think they need to get more games on the service pronto, though. They're way behind where they should be.

What I'd like even more than a subscription service would be a cartridge trade-in service. Honestly, it's not the prices that bug me, really, it's that I've already paid for the games. If I could ship in my old carts as "proof of purchase" to unlock some VC games, I'd be a very, very happy camper.

zombiejim @ Dec 5th 2006 5:02PM

Their reasoning is most likely that, despite cost it's easier for some people.

Say you're a casual gamer, and you want some retro titles. If you're not playing on a regular basis, do you still want to be paying on a regular basis?

Also, for the youngins. They would have a hard time making monthy payments. That or trying to convince their parents to pay yet another monthy fee so their kid can sit around to make the most of the cash.

Or the case of my cousin. The poor bastard only has dial-up. So he brings his Wii to friends houses to download the games. Make monthly payments and he can't even get that.

But because I don't want to be a fanboy, and I'd like to find fault in their service, I will admit this. They could have both options available. Maybe?

Darkness @ Dec 5th 2006 3:25PM

GlitchCog, you're being unreasonable. There is no way in hell every game should be up there. It would leave nothing for the future. No company would be silly enough to throw all chips on the table in the beginning. As it now they can set the games up with proper documentation (the game manuals are nice) and proper testing.

The other games that never came out in the States still have the possibility to be released in the future. No one knows what the future holds. I'd much rather have small installments of games every week than 4 every month or a large sum of them at the end of the month. People like things to look forward to in the future.

I'm looking forward to more releases and I hope that in the end they add more consoles up there including C64/Atari 800 games as well as 5200, 2600, Colecovision, etc. There is lots of potential there.

As for a subscription service...not sure how I'd feel about that. On one hand it would be good to pay $30 a month and be able to download as many of the old games as I want, but I think they want the system to be hassle free for the most part. If you have a subscription, then you start running into other problems and has to add more staff to handle those issues. Microsoft has to employ a crapload of people to handle Xbox Live (we have a HUGE Microsoft Live office here in Austin and the turnover is horrible). Too much money to invest into something like that. If I were them, I wouldn't do it.

I do like the idea of a featured game of the month that is a little demo people can check out and if they want to buy it, they can get the full version. If you want to demo, maybe that's the best way to go.

Joyce @ Dec 5th 2006 4:59PM

@5... Are you serious? You want EVERY game right away. Sheesh. This service isn't there to compete with your illegal ROM downloading habits. It's there to satisfy those of us that are totally willing to PAY for old games that we love. That's why we buy the Zelda Classic collection, the Sonic Mega Collection, and similar releases. We want to financially support these old games and bring them back.

For myself. I am TOTALLY happy with the VC service. I find myself checking it every day for new games, even though they're only supposed to come out on Mondays. I can't wait for more games, and, to be honest, the VC is one of the biggest reasons that I bought the Wii... I LOVE the idea of playing old games LEGALLY on a TV.

Me = happy.

GlitchCog @ Dec 5th 2006 3:42PM

Darkness,

Yes, but they purposely described the service like that. At E3 2005 Iwata implied that every game would be playable (crafty dodge since technically they are playable even if they don't let ut). Some official at NOE explicitly and sincerely said that people could download foreign content. It would be trivial to allow us to do it, and if they were sold, they'd make more money. There was serious talk that it would be free. This one was hard to believe, but people at Nintendo were sincerely suggesting it.

I understand that this was all lofty. I get that I I shouldn't expect all that. I didn't expect all that. And I understand that because they're a business they need to hold stuff back to make money in the future...

but, because they promised SO much, I thought they’d at least have 1% of their first party titles available at launch. It’s not even close. Based on what they promoted and could easily offer, we got a slap in the face. I’ve already paid for SMB three times in three different formats. Zelda too. The virtual console sucks, and I'm done with it.

Marty @ Dec 5th 2006 7:04PM

Nothing ruins the feeling of ownership more than a pay for play subscription service...

Francois @ Dec 5th 2006 5:37PM

I feel a subscription service would only be really beneficial to power users. Those who play games very often and like a diverse palette of games to be available to them. It's worth it for them to pay a fixed amount of money and have unlimited access. But for those who play in moderate amounts and are interested in only a few specific retro games (remember there's also a ton of new Wii games that'll come out every week once development ramps up), paying a fixed amount per month will feel like wasting money. For instance, what if there's a month you're too busy and you don't download anything? Or if there's nothing you're interested in getting? I still feel the a la carte model is still the most convenient and flexible.

chris w @ Dec 5th 2006 4:50PM

if you compare the strategies from MS and Nintendo, they are polar opposites on how they acquire your money.

Nintendo "gives" you a free online gameplay service, IN HOPES OF you buying virtual games and content. online Wii gameplay is there, but it's not going to be touted as much as everyone would like because it costs Nintendo money for the service/network traffic etc.... (it would be interesting to see the metrics on how much they hope/expect an average Wii owner to spend on VC content) also, this is why old games probably won't ever have online capabilities attached to them; due to the cost prohibitve nature of the purchase (again, because it's a single transaction, not a garaunteed monthly expense, Nintendo isn't really willing to gamble on something that wont sell)

But MS spreads out the costs by wanting the consumer to pony up the money up front and thereby garaunteeing a revenue stream. (this is why they "penalize" you for buying the cheap 1-month subs. cards) by allowing the service to be "paid for" by the consumer, they focus on actively creating new content (argueably this could be their crutch because they take too long :) ) But MS knows they need to keep consumers happy by actively envisioning more products to the live service. IMO, this is why they are the "Gold" standard of online service, they offer a cheap product, well.

hopefully Nintendo can address some of the issues with making the VC much more appealing with price points, demos, portability, and longevity. Right now, they are slowly but surely standing in online quicksand. They need to realize it before it reaches that point of no return and are rejected by the public.

> @ Dec 5th 2006 3:51PM

"Some official at NOE explicitly and sincerely said that people could download foreign content. It would be trivial to allow us to do it, and if they were sold, they'd make more money."

They have to respect the original region coding and distribution agreements. If it wasnt meant for NA then it cant be distributed here.

So, to distribute in a new region, they would have to negotiate a new distribution with the license holder... for each game they want to distribute in a new region.

Then, its just like localising any other game, which takes a lot of work and effort and eats into profits. In the end, its too complicated, too costly, and only a handful of people would pay for it; so its not worthwhile for them to do that.

The best way to play VC games from other regions is to download the ROM.

NintendoFanbot @ Dec 5th 2006 5:17PM

"Some official at NOE explicitly and sincerely said that people could download foreign content."

Jim Merrick said that. His specific example was that you might be able to download Super Mario RPG from America's server. As of right now, there is really no game on the service important enough to test it on. Games that came out in Japan are coming here but because of factors like ESRB and re-rating these downloads (or rating ones that were never rated), they are going to be delayed somewhat.

"There was serious talk that it would be free. This one was hard to believe, but people at Nintendo were sincerely suggesting it."

Yeah right. I did hear that UPGRADES (like Online multiplayer) would be free if they ever came out, however.

For some reason I can remember what Jim Merrick say but I rarely, if ever, recall Nintendo actually PROMISING anything.

Nintendo still has things to deliver on, such as whether or not 1st-Party Online Play will remain free (Iwata mentioned that it was their target to do so, but couldn't speak for other companies.). So far, without counting Friend Codes (they're getting closer to fixing that with Wii), it's worked out pretty well (ex: Tony Hawk's American Sk8land, Mario Kart, Animal Crossing, etc...).

If they do offer Online play for free it's gotta come from somewhere. Methinks that's what VC incomes goes for: maintaing their Online viability.

To be honest, I'd rather have the content on the lines of demos, patches and upgrades remain free while game ROMs that I purchase remain on my system. I don't really like the subscribtion idea.

Number One @ Dec 5th 2006 4:01PM

@ 14-Glitchdog

3 weeks in?! Wow... Because XBox Live was so perfect after 21 days... I f'n hate the lineup they have right now.. but I'm too busy loving the living daylights out of Zelda and sharing Miis to care right now... plus I have my job and rent payments to make. Oh and I have to worry about meeting women so I can meet that special someone and have children... Theres a lot Nintendo can do right now to make the American VC better, but considering that Japan had a delayed launch with a Wii Sports they had to pay for, considering much of the world had to stand your bitching and moaning while they played Shadow of the Collossus for the 40th time or just plain struggled to get decent food, you should really stop starring at your belly button and fucking get real.

GlitchCog @ Dec 5th 2006 4:12PM

Number One,

I disagree. There is no excuse for Nintendo to have created such a terrible service after promising so much.

Yes, Twilight Princess is awesome. Wii Sports is one of the coolest games I've ever played. I expect the Wii will be shown to be the dominant console this generation. But how do these features, while really cool, excuse the terrible virtual console? They do not. The VC was promised to be awesome, it would be trivial to make awesome, and yet it really, really sucks. Saying that the rest of the system is great, or that you're too busy to play those old games anyway, is not an acceptable excuse for this failure.

I'm a Nintendo fanboy too, which makes this virtual console debockle even more offensive.

Darkness @ Dec 5th 2006 5:13PM

Well, GlitchCog, I guess we simply have to agree to disagree with what's available on the VC. I'll admit that I wish there were some of the classics I enjoyed when I was younger (Where's G.I. Joe and Bionic Commando!!), however, I do understand they just got started. It hasn't been around long enough to really see the potential. Currently, I've only downloaded Ecco and hope to get Columns this weekend, and even though it's only two games, I like the idea of having them available if I want them.

We don't know what the future of the VC is or what they'll be adding later. My guess is we'll see Street Fighter II on the SNES and Link To the Past eventually. My girlfriend is waiting for Mario RPG and that should be coming in the next few weeks. I can wait, there are other games to play in the meantime. Just sit back, relax, and enjoy what we do have. It will get better. It's just a matter of time.

Ralph @ Dec 5th 2006 4:21PM

GlitchCog -

Well said. I'm a fanboy, as well, but, as you said, Nintendo touted this as a HUGE piece of the revolution. No need to be so stingy.

Ninegauger @ Dec 5th 2006 6:36PM

I bought 1000 Wii points to buy Super Mario Bros. I forgot that it's not available and I still have 1000 Wii Points.

I mean Sonic the Hedgehog and Ristar are on the Sonic Mega Collection.

The delayed release thing is kind of lame... well it wouldn't be if they already had some of the big games at launch (like in Japan). If they think that delaying the release of VC games is going to encourage me to buy retail games that I'm only marginally interested in then they're mistaken.

And as for Xbox Live... I bought Geometry Wars and then I brought my hard drive to another house and plugged it in and it wouldn't let me play the full version of Geometry Wars... it wanted to validate it my hooking to the internet which was not available so the Live stuff has weird restrictions too.

Rabish12 @ Dec 5th 2006 4:35PM

On the Big N comments: they're still big. The DS Lite continues to sell extremely well, and in the last reported sales posted here on Joystiq it sold more than double every other system out there (including the newly-released PS3, the original DS, and the PS2). Last I checked, the DS Lite was a Nintendo system.

ackmondual @ Dec 5th 2006 4:37PM

@ #5
I don't know what goes on behind the scenes in making VC titles available, but it can't be as simple as copying the ROMs of the games they already have to their servers. There's gotta be some techinical stuff, licensing issues with 3rd parties, bandwidth, compatibility, quality control, etc. that keep them from dumping all their content on there.

Just look at itunes. I don't believe they had more than 100,000 songs available for DL. Years later, they seem to have more than 1 million songs, ebooks, video clips, and podcasts available.

While I've brought that up, DO ANY OF YOU ALSO THINK THAT 99 CENTS PER TRACK IS UNREASONABLE? If that's the train of thought with music and video games, then you may as well just (assuming you're not already) emulate the games. I KNOW Nin is greedy (but then again, what corporation isN'T?), but it could be charging $2 per NES title and $8 for SNES won't cover their costs.

Rabish12 @ Dec 5th 2006 4:37PM

Oh, and I forgot to mention that was in Japan, before someone else points that out.

Firefly @ Dec 5th 2006 5:48PM

They would never make a VC subscription service b/c, remember, Wii is supposed to be easy to use and access, if they complicate it in ways like that it will turn off the casual gamer. With the exception of price, its not as bad as everyone says it is.

The price- it has to remain consistant for all games: If nintendo lowered the price on VC 1st party titles, few people would buy 3rd party ones and all those companys would leave VC and it would fail. Everyone has to keep all these factors in mind.

samfish @ Dec 5th 2006 5:39PM

I said in the thread last night that I also think the subscription service is a great idea. If I were in charge (Oh, me and my fantasies!) here's how I would set it up:

• You have the option to join the subscription service of just outright buy the games like you can now. If you're a member of the subscription service and you like a game enough, you can BUY it at a reduced rate (say, $3.00 for NES games rather than $5.00)
• Nintendo should, eventually, at least, have a "bargain bin" of old games that really aren't that great, but you could buy them at a reduced rate, subscriber or not. Does anyone remember the game Xexlyz on the NES? I'd love to play that again, even though it really sucked. For a dollar or two, I'd totally go for it. Seriously, does anyone rememberthat game, though? Even Google doesn't.
• They should STILL offer demos. Make them playable for 5 minutes or so.
• Have a "Game Of The Month". Hell, have a "Free Game Of The Week" ala iTunes. It's not like they'd lose THAT much by offering a beloved classic for a week in the long run, furthermore some obscure title.
• Clean up the interface. It sucks and it's clunky right now.
• Offer original content seperately. Why? To really make people understand that they're actually getting something new. Offer demos and DLs only.
• Add online multiplayer content to the obvious games. Christ, some of these games are so simple, *I* could do it. If nothing else, it'd make a great college/university intern program and they get cheap labor.
• And most importantly, LINE UP 3RD PARTY GAMES! Throw 'em ALL up there! It's not like they don't exist by the thousands.

Ultimately, I want to be able to scroll through a HUGE (vertical) list like I do in my iTunes library. Do I expect that now? Hell no.
But this time next year, if the VC isn't a HELL of a lot better and more user friendly, I'll have to admit it's an overall failure...and one of the biggest selling points of the Wii, for me, was/is the VC.

Ralph @ Dec 5th 2006 6:10PM

Actually, I DO think 99 cents is too much for a song on iTunes. Think about what you're buying....no Walmart, no CD, no packaging, just a file. So if you're cutting out the middle-man and all of the carbon materials, why would I pay the same for that song as I would if it were on an actual CD?

syco @ Dec 5th 2006 5:15PM

I won't comment on a Subscription Service as I feel it is virtually impossible that Nintendo would ever do that. I will instead comment on VC as it stands today:

I haven't bought any VC games yet, but I plan to eventually. The situation could be better than it is, for sure, but even if every supported console's full library was available, I never planned to spend a great deal of time playing old games when I have dozens of Gamecube games I could replay and dozens more I will be picking out of bargain bins in the coming year, on top of the new games that will come out for the system...

Even if I had the full library to pick through I'd probably only get 10 games or so total. As far as I'm concerned Nintendo isn't really obligated to do anything with infrastructure they have set up with VC, but I don't doubt that they will have a decent collection in 6 months to a year and it will suffice, even if it's more limited than it could be.

Community-Based Song Lyrics @ Dec 5th 2006 4:55PM

Why do people even respond to ">" flamebait anymore?

Community-Based Song Lyrics @ Dec 5th 2006 4:55PM

BTW, why couldn't they do both? Problem solved. Thanks.

Sketchy Fletchy @ Dec 5th 2006 6:10PM

Give it time, guys. There's a crapton of games to be sorted and bug tested before they can be released on the VC. I expect the rate at which VC titles are released will start to increase in the next year. But seriously, the Wii still hasn't released all over the world (Australia: 15 hours, 20 minutes more, damnit!!! XP) and online services haven't been fully assessed yet. What people don't seem to realise is that the kind of online services Nintendo are planning to offer are not simply a matter of setting up a server and forgetting about it - a lot of people will be required to maintain VC services effectively, and it takes time and money to get a lumbering beast like that going, which Nintendo are currently putting into actually getting the console out on the market.

As far as a subscription service, I think that works for Gametap because they specifically offer a subscription service for dedicated gamers. With Nintendo's 'anyone and everyone' policy, a subscription model simply doesn't fit. A subscription requires that you will be willing to download and play enough games per month to make it worthwhile. If I don't download $30 a month worth of games, what's the point?

That's where I call shenanigans on some of the arguments presented here. People are saying Nintendo are greedy for charging a premium for downloads. What a shock - games cost money! But a subscription service with Nintendo's user base is possibly a more greedy option - if you only download and play one or two games every few months, then paying a continuous monthly fee to retain those games is ridiculous. Not everyone will want to download hundreds of titles either, or has the time to spend playing through said titles.

I'm not saying it's an impossible model, but it would only work for dedicated gamers. It may be possible to offer some sort of a premium account for large scale VC users, which operates like a subscription service - pay a monthly fee, get unlimited downloads. However, running a subscription service and singular persistent download service in tandem would be prohibitively expensive.

Look at it this way - it's a free online service (as opposed to the monthly fee for Xbox Live), which is oonly going to get better with time. So give it more than three weeks before you wash your hands of it.

Cheers!

Number One @ Dec 5th 2006 6:23PM

@ 22-Glitch dog

I understand your concern. Truely the american lineup is crap with a capital "c." I always imagined that once the wii was launched worldwide things would start to pick up. Yes Japan got the long end of the stick on the VC side of things but they got shafted in the timeline so that north america could get its wii on sooner. I see their first party VC titles as an apology card from Nintendo. I would much rather pay 5 bucks for LoZ (which I wont, I'm only holding out for Genesis classics) than 30 or 40 odd dollars for Wii Sports which is, unless I am mistaken, what they are doing in Japan. VC is not a failure yet. Yes its sort of odd that VC didnt launch with a decent mario title, but 21 days is a short ass time. On Christmas day, if there isnt a decent title on VC I will join your boat. Until then, I've got Raving Rabbits, Wii Boxing, Zelda and plain old everyday trials and tribulations to keep me busy...