The Free NES/SNES Game You Get With Switch Online Only Valid For One Month

 Pages 1 2 NEXT
 

The Free NES/SNES Game You Get With Switch Online Only Valid For One Month

nintendo switch

The "free" games you get with your Nintendo Switch online subscription can only be played for one month.

Nintendo is doing a lot of new things with its new Switch console, including the addition of an actual proper online service. The service is paid, but like PlayStation Plus or Xbox Live Gold, it does come with some perks. One of those perks is a "free NES or SNES game every month." At the time of its reveal, there was a bit of confusion surrounding this. We assumed it would work like PlayStation Plus, in that you get to keep the free game after the month is up, but Nintendo has now confirmed that the "free" game will only be playable for one month, unless you buy it.

"Confirmed by NOA," Tweeted Wired's Chris Kohler. "Monthly free classic game on Switch is indeed only available for that month."

"After a month, you can no longer PLAY the monthly Switch online classic unless you buy it," he clarified in a second Tweet.

Rivals Microsoft and Sony offer Games With Gold and PS Plus Free Games which do not expire at the end of the month (although they do become unplayable if your subscription lapses).

Source: Chris Kohler

Permalink

I will defend paid online for the Switch, but I wont defend this. It should be for keeps.

Well fuck you too Nintendo. Seriously, what the fuck is this noise?

So xbl gives me 4 free games a month I get to keep (my games library is now like 100) The big N gives us 1 30 day rental of a 20-30 year old game with some new features added on... Yay?

Mm that free for the low low price of actual money. I don't mind the pay for service but the games are included at no additional charge. They are not free in any sense of the word.

Yep, more fail.

At this point, I WANT the Switch to bomb.

I'm dying to hear what contrived excuse the fans come up with.

So I guess the key is to pick a game that only takes you a month to finish. Challenge accepted.

Paying a subscription for online multiplayer with the only real addition being one month rentals of 20-30 year old games is just a baffling decision. If this is price similarly to xbox live and ps plus then is a right slap in the face and a display of arrogance that Nintendo can ill afford after the Wii U. Hell at any price this "offer" is pretty hard to swallow. And that is saying nothing of their standard virtual console pricing which I imagine is going to continue in the same vain if this is anything to go by.

A system where you could download one or two virtual console games a month from any of Nintendo's older systems (NES, SNES, GBC, GBA, DS, Gamecube and Wii) that you can keep for as long as you are subscribed makes a lot more sense and would be more appealing. Playstation Plus pretty much set the template for this kind of thing, just rip that off verbatim if in doubt.

For what it's worth I really like the look of the Switch but with stuff like this and their pricing on accessories I just cannot consider it a worthwhile purchase unless they have a serious rethink.

If they aren't going to even allow you to keep the games you get, as well they are simply 20-30 year old titles that can be easily emulated, the service should be cheep to compensate. Sony charges about 60 dollars a year now, in that time you get about 24 games. Not always great but they are games. Nintendo gives you a rental of ONE game a month, unless it also includes some serious discounts then the service shouldn't be more then... I dunno, 20 bucks a year at most?

Such a uniquely Nintendo move... even EA routinely just gives away its older games on Origin (and their library is much more limited). When you take what could be a good thing and fuck it up because you can't bring yourself to be at least as generous as Microsoft, Sony, and EA, then you should know you're just being a money-grubbing asshole.

Ya know, I really was pretty excited for the Switch when they announced it since it sounds like something that will get me back into getting a Nintendo console.

But this kind of news happening is slowly draining my excitement. At least PS Plus lets you keep the damn game, or until you let you subscription slide.

Two steps forward, one step back seems to be Nintendo's thing.

... maybe they will offer new games on VC, too... huehueue................ You know, BotW or something.............

It's so cool. You'd think that after the failure that was the WiiU, Nintendo would try to really convince people, restoring faith and such nonsense.

Must be a sign that they could tank yet another failed generation. I don't mean to say that the Switch is already doomed, but come on - after the WiiU and the slaps in the faces with it for most fans, I did expect a $250 Switch bundled with a game. Instead, we get a $70 Pro-Controller, 32 GB storage with a maximum of, I think, 125 GB, a $90 charging station, a forced subscription if you care to play online and trial versions of ass-old games and, of course, a superbly weak launch line-up with only BotW as something remotely interesting. Also, gotta pay them at least $350 in total to fucking use their console to begin with, if you are sane and don't consider turning it on as being able to use that fucking thing.

Funny thing is that I like everything else. And that I'm surprised about how bold-- APPLE-LIKE Nintendo behaves after a massive failure.

They must sit on a shit-ton of money, still.

You know Nintendo has fucked up when Microsoft and Sony's services are exponentially more attractive.

Seriously Nintendo, your free online service was the ONE advantage you had over your competitors in this field. Not only did you throw that away, but you then proceeded to pour gasoline on it and set it ablaze.

Nintendo is beginning to sound more and more like a drug dealer in its practices than a company.
First hit's free, because I'm a nice guy, and whatnot.

At this point I just wonder what they're smoking over there.

Queen Michael:
So I guess the key is to pick a game that only takes you a month to finish. Challenge accepted.

That would be all of them, but how fun is it to play on a deadline? Compared to no deadline at least.

Games with Gold allows you to play even with a lapsed sub, don't think PS+ does? Both better than this either way.

I suppose the only thing that I can really say in response to this is: "Oh, Nintendo".

Temporary game and having to use a smartphone to chat.

Come on Nintendo. If you're going to charge money for Online, at least make it worth it.

Woof, not looking good right out of the gate for Nintendo. At least with PS+ and XBLG there's some trade-offs to keep them balanced, but the Switch service looks to be strictly worse. Now, they could CHANGE that and course correct like Microsoft has been doing, but wishful thinking (shit-posting) might not change that much.

Petromir:
Games with Gold allows you to play even with a lapsed sub, don't think PS+ does? Both better than this either way.

not entirely true. not anymore. the 360 iteration didn't require an active gold sub, but when the X1 came out, that policy changed, and you can no longer play the free games without an active sub. this doesn't retroactively apply to 360 titles, and as far as i know, the 360 GWG still don't require gold, though i feel like i heard that changed for the worse as well recently.

Johnny Novgorod:
I'm dying to hear what contrived excuse the fans come up with.

That micro SDXC theoretically supports up to 2tb, so it's all chill. Who cares if the avaliable 512 gb ones cost almost as much as the Switch itself, it's Zelda man!

Oh Nintendo. Every time. Every time I think you might be changing, every time I give you the benefit of the doubt, you never fail to let me down. You will always find a way to ruin a good thing. I'm quickly losing sight of why I cared. You caught my interest with SMT and Zelda, but that's not enough to buy your console. I suspect we have another failure on our hands, all because Nintendo doesn't understand how competition works. They have a weaker console, a weaker library, a weaker fan base, and a weaker online service, and yet they want to charge a premium for their console. It appears their new president isn't going to save the company after all.

Cool "service".
Thanks again for making this the standard, microsoft.

Saelune:
I will defend paid online for the Switch

Enjoy the time when they lock the multiplayer of the next pokemon behind this then.

Johnny Novgorod:
I'm dying to hear what contrived excuse the fans come up with.

I am a Nintendo fan.

*cough*

Fuck that noise. (I am however, not a highly insecure, easily led fan) The gimmicky ness was already sticking fast to this, the launch library is sparse and unpromising. The battery life is still highly unimpressive to play for any time on a game worth it's salt. The memory!? And the pricepoint?!

Not impressed with this showing at all, I hope they enjoy having a second Wii U on their hands because at this point I can't think of anything to defend it with. They can't have a family friendly toy-gaming machine and a PC-esque gaming console all at once, well they can, but they've compromised in both columns and are going to end up pleasing neither demographic.

...sooo, not only are they doing the same thing as PS+ and Xbox Gold by charging a subscription fee instead of having free access to multiplayer, they're also going to be offering a worse service than the Playstation and Xbox? Seriously? Who the fuck thought this was a good idea? Whoever they are they should be thrown into the company Yoshi pit for criminal stupidity.

Charli:

Johnny Novgorod:
I'm dying to hear what contrived excuse the fans come up with.

I am a Nintendo fan.

*cough*

Fuck that noise. (I am however, not a highly insecure, easily led fan) The gimmicky ness was already sticking fast to this, the launch library is sparse and unpromising. The battery life is still highly unimpressive to play for any time on a game worth it's salt. The memory!? And the pricepoint?!

Not impressed with this showing at all, I hope they enjoy having a second Wii U on their hands because at this point I can't think of anything to defend it with. They can't have a family friendly toy-gaming machine and a PC-esque gaming console all at once, well they can, but they've compromised in both columns and are going to end up pleasing neither demographic.

Another Nintendo fan here, just adding the fact I agree with you completely. I'll prob get it, but I don't play console games online, so I won't be paying that fee. However, I do pay for PS+ because for the price of a cheap lunch per month, I can play games that I haven't bought, and I have found to get a decent amount out of them. But not in the very month I got them. Luckily these are old games, so I can just use an emulator on my PC I guess, if I cared.

nintendo it seem you are trying so hard to get me to not buy the switch. i guess you won nintendo.

It seems like a poor deal. The competition allows you to keep playing the games until the subscription is cancelled, so there is still some sort of deadline stress with the competition. The latter is however preferable since the consumer is actually in control.

The only sliver of hope to turn this deal into a more agreeable one would be if the service is very inexpensive. That, or if the NES/SNES game of the month turn out to be entirely of the player's choosing(e.g. "For June I chose Super Metroid, for July Mario All stars, for August Mario All Stars again, I hadn't finished it..."). The description leaves that possibility open, though I frankly do not think that is the case.

Bedinsis:

The only sliver of hope to turn this deal into a more agreeable one would be if the service is very inexpensive. That, or if the NES/SNES game of the month turn out to be entirely of the player's choosing(e.g. "For June I chose Super Metroid, for July Mario All stars, for August Mario All Stars again, I hadn't finished it..."). The description leaves that possibility open, though I frankly do not think that is the case.

Hahaha, no. I bet you are getting Balloon Fight or whatever old toss Nintendo wants to throw at their fans that month. Just some old old game that nobody even cared about at launch. Like ... what is probably mostly floating around in their virtual store right now.

Also, I bet, like with previous consoles, they are going to relaunch that virtual store, so the Switch will be looking at an empty store front and only a small drip feed of old games to fill it.

martyrdrebel27:

Petromir:
Games with Gold allows you to play even with a lapsed sub, don't think PS+ does? Both better than this either way.

not entirely true. not anymore. the 360 iteration didn't require an active gold sub, but when the X1 came out, that policy changed, and you can no longer play the free games without an active sub. this doesn't retroactively apply to 360 titles, and as far as i know, the 360 GWG still don't require gold, though i feel like i heard that changed for the worse as well recently.

Not my experience, didn't lose access to my xbox one gwg games when my sub lapsed in the autumn.

Well, fuck you, too, Nintendo.

No. I mean it. This is a slap in the face. Give me a game like Mario RPG and then take it away before I can finish it? That's a dick move.

Worse yet, these are old games they are giving away. If these were on other services, they probably wouldn't be more than $10 to buy. And PS+ isn't giving away PS1 games for free. It's giving away relatively newer games. Same with XBLG. It's not even worth the money.

How utterly incompetent. To copy what your competition does, but do objectively worse? Might as well not even offered the free game. It would be less insulting to your customers.

Saelune:
I will defend paid online for the Switch, but I wont defend this. It should be for keeps.

Why would you defend it? It gives you absolutely no benefits as far as we know over the WiiU or 3DS, yet it asks you to pay for it. The game is a one month deal. You're forced to use your freaking Smartphone for the communication. Worst online service and they dare to actually charge for it? Why defend a shitty purely anti-consumer practice?
I mean, if you removed all names so that I don't know it's about Nintendo I would expect this to see on Jim's "Oh Ubisoft" or "Fuck Konami" news.

chozo_hybrid:
However, I do pay for PS+ because for the price of a cheap lunch per month, I can play games that I haven't bought, and I have found to get a decent amount out of them. But not in the very month I got them.

Honestly, at this point I continue my subsrciption more for the discounts than anything. The monthy free games are pretty garbage now.

 Pages 1 2 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here