Nintendo Switch Game News and Releases.

jester77

This would make sense on a console or PC that is always connected. I specifically got the switch because of its portability, streaming to it makes no sense. How can I play this on my next flight? This can only fail.

TitianGerm

sligeach wrote: »

And how's Xtravision doing these days? This is absolute b0110x for a whole host of reasons, I already mentioned one, but then there's the fact that you can buy it on the other platforms for £15 and you own it outright, or that the Switch is primarily a portable, streaming out and about isn't going to work well with this game.

Xtravision closed because everything is going digital, no other reason.

I've never seen RE7 for £15? Might pick it up at that price.

Also we seem to go over this a lot but I'll say it again. You can't expect a game that's been out for months on one platform to start at the current price of those platforms on a new platform. It does not make financial sense in the real world.

If I was able to rent a digital game on Switch/Xbox/PS4 for a few euro for a week I'd do it. It'd let me see if I'd enjoy the game and if it's worthwhile buying it. It'd work great where developers haven't released a demo.

TitianGerm

fixxxer wrote: »

I've played a few games on PS Now and if any kind of fast reactions are required then its a no go. The lag cannot be eliminated completely so it makes certain types of games very difficult as you kind of have to predict what's going to happen to play properly.

That's a benefit Game Pass has over Now, you download the game to play when you want and it takes lag out of the equation all together.

chrislad

TitianGerm wrote: »

Xtravision closed because everything is going digital, no other reason.

I've never seen RE7 for £15? Might pick it up at that price.

http://www.argos.ie/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/Search?storeId=10152&catalogId=14551&langId=111&searchTerms=resident+evil+7&authToken=

And that's bricks and mortar, could probably find it cheaper online.

While a streaming service isn't a bad idea, per se, for a console that can't handle the graphical requirements of a game, I don't think we are there yet. I stream PS4 internally on my network and there's a ton of degrading compared to just playing it locally. I can't imagine how much worse it could be on an actual external network.

TitianGerm

chrislad wrote: »

http://www.argos.ie/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/Search?storeId=10152&catalogId=14551&langId=111&searchTerms=resident+evil+7&authToken=

And that's bricks and mortar, could probably find it cheaper online.

While a streaming service isn't a bad idea, per se, for a console that can't handle the graphical requirements of a game, I don't think we are there yet. I stream PS4 internally on my network and there's a ton of degrading compared to just playing it locally. I can't imagine how much worse it could be on an actual external network.

Cheers, will grab that this weekend and give it a blast. Hadn't realised it had dropped in price so much.

CiDeRmAn

Grumpypants wrote: »

Resident Evil 7 out in Japan on Thursday and streaming only. No cart or digital download!.

About €15 for a 180 day pass.

Seems like a novel idea but as i look at the list of games much older than 6 months that i've yet to get around to finishing i'd be wary.

Just read this and find it worrying indeed.
I pay for a subscription service on the PS, but that covers multiple titles and a now vast library across four consoles, PS3, 4, Vita and PSP.
But the idea of spending €15 to "borrow" access to a game for 180 days, when I can buy it for the PS4 for only a little more at this point, that's a boot in the nethers right there.
Blatant exploitation of Switch owners right there.
I mean, given the feat of getting Resi VII onto the Switch in the first place, I would have had no issue with paying 50/60 euro for it, but the plan of issuing temp access to it for €15, that's disgusting tbh and sets a very dangerous and seductive precedent for other developers.
B0ll0x to that!

Maxpfizer

sligeach wrote: »

And how's Xtravision doing these days?

Replaced by streaming services?

Maxpfizer

CiDeRmAn wrote: »

Just read this and find it worrying indeed.
I pay for a subscription service on the PS, but that covers multiple titles and a now vast library across four consoles, PS3, 4, Vita and PSP.
But the idea of spending €15 to "borrow" access to a game for 180 days, when I can buy it for the PS4 for only a little more at this point, that's a boot in the nethers right there.
Blatant exploitation of Switch owners right there.
I mean, given the feat of getting Resi VII onto the Switch in the first place, I would have had no issue with paying 50/60 euro for it, but the plan of issuing temp access to it for €15, that's disgusting tbh and sets a very dangerous and seductive precedent for other developers.
B0ll0x to that!

Yup. They are definitely testing the waters for the idea of selling games on a "pay per play" basis.

The backlash on microtransactions has probably got all of them thinking of new ways to monetize games in an ongoing way rather than just letting you buy the game and play it forever.

I could easily imagine Capcom trying to pull something like this with the next Street Fighter. With SFV they tried releasing with no arcade mode and then having "season passes" to get access to new characters.

I'd say it's not much of a leap from there to "15 euro per month to access the game". Probably they would get more individual games trying the game out for 15 and then they'd be getting way more than their usual 60 from players who want to play the game for a couple of years.

jester77

I also don't see this model working for a lot of gamers. I would love to have more time to dedicate to games, but life gets in the way. I usually end up having a backlog of games that I buy just sitting there for when I do have time in the future. With this type of model, I would end up spending a lot less on games, and there would be no chance that I would be paying a subscription here and there for when I have time in the future to play.

CastorTroy

Once again we see Capcom "testing" the Switch. So if no one buys into it, do they then act like Swich users don't want Resident Evil on the console?
How did Revelations sell?

Grassey

Yeah the current model of me paying top buck on release day to ignore game until a later time period when I can dip into it (and current price is a fraction of what I originally paid) should suit developers much more!!!

ERG89

Has streaming worked well enough on any system to be considered a success?
Input delay, lag & possible need of a wired connection given internet speeds doesn't make me want to consider this as a possibility. Plus it's cheap enough on other systems although without DLC.

CiDeRmAn

Isn't it not dissimilar to the EA effort on the Xbox and PC, but there you get access to a lot of past EA titles, which Sony rejected as it represented competition to their PS Plus service.
I had an Xbox Gold, PS Plus and EA GamePass whatever they called it before cancelling the latter.
TBH, having all of those old EA titles on tap was of little use, as it wasn't even that many, and nothing that, if I really wanted it, I couldn't have gotten from CEX for bugger all, so I cancelled the sub.

Now a player is going to be asked to pay an annual fee of €30 to play Resi VII, which is only a little less than I should be paying for it as a physical or downloaded title.

I would imagine this is going to be simply a download of the digital game and that you'll only be allowed play it once your licence to do so is confirmed with a digital handshake, which makes one wonder what'll happen when you are on the go, with no online connection and you want to play it.

Maxpfizer

ERG89 wrote: »

Has streaming worked well enough on any system to be considered a success?
Input delay, lag & possible need of a wired connection given internet speeds doesn't make me want to consider this as a possibility. Plus it's cheap enough on other systems although without DLC.

I don't think so. With improving technology we could get there in a few years though.

One of the things they will be looking at for sure is the kind of money EA makes from FIFA UT or the kind of money GTA V online brings in and how that compares to sales of the base game.

If the microtransactions are about to go away then some kind of pay per play or streaming option might be on the cards.

maximoose

CiDeRmAn wrote: »

I would imagine this is going to be simply a download of the digital game and that you'll only be allowed play it once your licence to do so is confirmed with a digital handshake, which makes one wonder what'll happen when you are on the go, with no online connection and you want to play it.

It's streaming, online connection required.

(More PSNow than EA Access)

ThunbergsAreGo

CiDeRmAn wrote: »

Isn't it not dissimilar to the EA effort on the Xbox and PC, but there you get access to a lot of past EA titles, which Sony rejected as it represented competition to their PS Plus service.
I had an Xbox Gold, PS Plus and EA GamePass whatever they called it before cancelling the latter.
TBH, having all of those old EA titles on tap was of little use, as it wasn't even that many, and nothing that, if I really wanted it, I couldn't have gotten from CEX for bugger all, so I cancelled the sub.

Now a player is going to be asked to pay an annual fee of €30 to play Resi VII, which is only a little less than I should be paying for it as a physical or downloaded title.

I would imagine this is going to be simply a download of the digital game and that you'll only be allowed play it once your licence to do so is confirmed with a digital handshake, which makes one wonder what'll happen when you are on the go, with no online connection and you want to play it.

I got loads of value out of the EA Access on the Xbox, but that is a console that is stationary and should be "always online"

The value of the switch is in its portability, I tend to go online only to buy or download games, which makes this decision rather peculiar (although it is Japan only for now)

TitianGerm

naughtb4 wrote: »

I got loads of value out of the EA Access on the Xbox, but that is a console that is stationary and should be "always online"

The value of the switch is in its portability, I tend to go online only to buy or download games, which makes this decision rather peculiar (although it is Japan only for now)

You don't stream the games with EA Access or Game Pass on Xbox. With PSNow you steam.

In order for something to work on Switch I'd imagine it would have to follow the Microsoft template and have a license check every so often to make sure you still have an active subscription.

blockfighter

maximoose wrote: »

It's streaming, online connection required.

(More PSNow than EA Access)

Ya apparently the download filesize is less than 50mb. Great for saving space on your sd card but not good for gameplay.

CiDeRmAn

Streaming games.... to the Switch... nope, as much as I love Nintendo, which I think is well established at this stage, my system stutters with some videos even when docked, so no way in seven hells that it is going to be capable of streaming something like Resi VII.
So, Capcom, with all due respect, shove it up your h0le.

sligeach

I've been reading that this streaming deal with Resident Evil 7 on Switch is likely to be and remain Japan exclusive. Capcom are really anti consumer. They're constantly trying to find ways of eradicating the secondhand market.

TitianGerm

sligeach wrote: »

I've been reading that this streaming deal with Resident Evil 7 on Switch is likely to be and remain Japan exclusive. Capcom are really anti consumer. They're constantly trying to find ways of eradicating the secondhand market.

The developer doesn't make any money from the second hand market so you can hardly blame them?

If they really wanted to stop the second hand market they could restrict the license of each game to one time use.

fixXxer

sligeach wrote: »

I've been reading that this streaming deal with Resident Evil 7 on Switch is likely to be and remain Japan exclusive. Capcom are really anti consumer. They're constantly trying to find ways of eradicating the secondhand market.

They don't make any money from it so it's not surprising. Especially the way Gamestop have it optimized to make them the most possible money. I can't imagine they are the only retail chain to do it either.

Rhyme

TitianGerm wrote: »

If they really wanted to stop the second hand market they could restrict the license of each game to one time use.

Didn't either SONY or Microsoft try this before an E3 some year? Maybe before the PS4/Xbox One. The other side then made a public announcement that they won't be doing that and their stock soared. It'd be a ballsy and stupid move to try it again but I wouldn't put it past certain developers.

TitianGerm

Rhyme wrote: »

Didn't either SONY or Microsoft try this before an E3 some year? Maybe before the PS4/Xbox One. The other side then made a public announcement that they won't be doing that and their stock soared. It'd be a ballsy and stupid move to try it again but I wouldn't put it past certain developers.

Microsoft did but that was to say you always needed to be online to check the game licence.

They presented the idea poorly but if it had of went ahead we would have had a supped up version of game sharing as a lot of it was toned down to what we have today based on the community backlash.

fixXxer

Rhyme wrote: »

Didn't either SONY or Microsoft try this before an E3 some year? Maybe before the PS4/Xbox One. The other side then made a public announcement that they won't be doing that and their stock soared. It'd be a ballsy and stupid move to try it again but I wouldn't put it past certain developers.

Microsoft tried to do it but there was a huge backlash. Sony then released their cute little video showing their way of doing where the guy just handed to game to the other guy.

To be honest, I always thought the season pass wasn't the worst idea. You get the basic game you want and pay extra for the bells and whistles. Shame these things always ended up abused.

CiDeRmAn

Streaming also means that the Switch doesn't have to do any of the processing heavy lifting which potentially means more complex titles on the system, as long as you can tolerate the bandwidth requirements and the financial requirements.

sligeach

Rhyme wrote: »

Didn't either SONY or Microsoft try this before an E3 some year? Maybe before the PS4/Xbox One. The other side then made a public announcement that they won't be doing that and their stock soared. It'd be a ballsy and stupid move to try it again but I wouldn't put it past certain developers.

Ya, Microsoft announced that at their reveal of XB1 at E3. Sony were going to do likewise at their conference for PS4 which followed Microsoft's, but the backlash was so instantaneous and of such biblical proportions, Sony quickly cut that from their reveal. Capcom don't have to deal with producing hardware though, so they can try different things. Some say it's why a few of their games on Switch are partial download, so that if someone sells on a game, the buyer doesn't get the full package.

jester77

TitianGerm wrote: »

The developer doesn't make any money from the second hand market so you can hardly blame them?

If they really wanted to stop the second hand market they could restrict the license of each game to one time use.

I don't buy that. They can simply release it as a digital download of they want to stop the second hand market.

The switch is not good enough to handle REVII so I can see why they are testing this, but it goes against everything the switch is about. Hopefully this guess nowhere, as time limited subs is a no go for most people.

TitianGerm

jester77 wrote: »

I don't buy that. They can simply release it as a digital download of they want to stop the second hand market.

The switch is not good enough to handle REVII so I can see why they are testing this, but it goes against everything the switch is about. Hopefully this guess nowhere, as time limited subs is a no go for most people.

You don't buy what?

I'm saying if the developer didn't want a a game to be on the second hand market but still wanted gamers to have a physical edition they could tie the license on the disk/cart to the profile that first uses the game.

Mr.Saturn

A game that severely compromises the Switch's unique selling point -its portability- is one for which I do not have all that much optimism. That's before we get to any of the craic surrounding licenses, passes and timed-access. It seems as though Capcom are essentially trying to monetize the early stages of a better idea, which is consistent with the whole game-selling business these days.