Nintendo Switch Online price increase. Is it justified?

N

Negotiator

Banned


Currently you can buy 1 year of NSO for $20.

It seems Nintendo plans to adopt Sony's pricing scheme and maybe remove the cheaper tier? (even if they don't remove it, the price gulf between 20 and 70 is too high, so expect them to increase that too)

How is this justified? Adding party chat (most likely p2p, which is free) is not a compelling reason.

Will Switch 1 owners get screwed (20 -> 70) if they just wanna play Mario Kart/Splatoon online?

Should people stack a few more years of regular NSO at $20?
 
Why should we believe any of this? Why is there not a single new game that people don't already know of announced to be at launch?
 
Last edited:
Negotiator said:


Currently you can buy 1 year of NSO for $20.

It seems Nintendo plans to adopt Sony's pricing scheme and maybe remove the cheaper tier? (even if they don't remove it, the price gulf between 20 and 70 is too high, so expect them to increase that too)

How is this justified? Adding party chat (most likely p2p, which is free) is not a compelling reason.

Will Switch 1 owners get screwed (20 -> 70) if they just wanna play Mario Kart/Splatoon online?

Should people stack a few more years of regular NSO at $20?
Click to expand...

Need to know what Nintendo is offering at $70 first.

Switch in US at $500 wouldn't sell well beyond the early adapters.
 
Nintendo Switch Online price increase. Is it justified?
Click to expand...

Season 2 Lol GIF by Insecure on HBO


NSO isn't worth its current price, so definitely not.
 
Tetris 99 is one of the best games of the generation and F-Zero 99 is great too. They'll always have a base subscription from me for those titles. It will be interesting to see if they add platforms to the expansion pass tier.
 
Why would they show BotW upscaled (I assume through backwards compatibility) and then also release a 'remastered' version of it? Makes little sense to me, so I assume this is fake info.

Anyway, NSO will likely increase in price at some point and no it's not worth it. Paying for online play has always been a scam and I hate that Sony and Nintendo followed suit.
 
I already said if they launch with BOTW as launch game I skip, just let me upscale old one. But they're doing both?

Glad I can overlook this, it doesn't make much sense.
 
The potential for Switch 2 to be able to play backwards compatible Switch games with their docked settings in portable mode is perhaps the most exciting thing for me.
 
Nintendos online service is dog crap. It feels like something from the early 2000s. Every nintendo game runs like poo poo and lags consistently because the next time nintendo gets actual servers instead of using peer to peer connections will be the first time. Add to that you got 0 achievement system, 0 way to communicate with people online, 0 way to voice chat with people outside of some dumb terrible mobile app and man ohh man is the service junk. The funny thing is that nintendo had a better online service for the wii then they do now and that service was free. So is a price increase justified you ask....


no-absolutely.gif
 
Last edited:
NSO is the worst of the big 3.

Like holy shit have you looked at the nes or snes offerings? It's so bad that it makes me angry. Horrible selection and very limited as well.

Are they gonna offer discounts on 1st party games? Yeah fucking right.

No way am I renewing nso
 
A 50 dollar increase is huge. I like the price it is now. Because it is just a service I casually use. And 20 a year is not much. I am sure an increase is incoming. Make the base plan 40.
 
Paid multiplayer isn't justified on any console.
The only justification they need is that Sony/MS charge just as much (or more) and they know that for the vast majority of their audience it's not going to be a dealbreaker
 
Last edited:
AJUMP23 said:
A 50 dollar increase is huge. I like the price it is now. Because it is just a service I casually use. And 20 a year is not much. I am sure an increase is incoming. Make the base plan 40.
Click to expand...
If they actually put a little effort into nso i would be OK with $40.

I'm 100% with this statement, "Because it is just a service I casually use."
 
Paying to be able to play online and using cloud saves is never justified. Nintendo, Sony and Microsoft are doing it because enough retards are willing to pay.
 
1080p and 2K are the same thing. Do they mean 1440p docked?

"2K" isn't really a thing in terms of TV resolutions at all.
 
Last edited:
If that botw remaster is just an uptick in res and fps as rumoured and also costs $70, my days.

I'd hope they really improved it tbh
 
hououinkyouma00 said:
Are we sure this is saying $20 > $70 or $50 > $70?

Because it could mean the Online + Expansion Pass is going up $20.
Click to expand...
Even if that's the case, is there any chance of keeping the lower tier at $20?

What will happen to NSO subscribers that have stacked up to 3 years of subscription? (I assume they won't be affected, but you never know with Nintendo)

I also hope BoTW Remastered doesn't mean paying another $70 instead of a free patch, but it looks like they want to copy Sony's strategy.

Risky moves, these could affect Switch 2's success. More so if it's priced at $499 due to tariffs.
 
For me it's worth it... much more than psn or xbl.
I don't play multiplayer online games but I do play and use the stuff that comes with Nintendo online.

And yeah if the switch 2 gets Elden ring and all the jrpgs that have online aspects then I can drop my psn sub for sure.
 
Last edited:
hououinkyouma00 said:
Are we sure this is saying $20 > $70 or $50 > $70?

Because it could mean the Online + Expansion Pass is going up $20.
Click to expand...

That's what it reads as...

If the base NSO is still $20/yr that's not so bad at all.

Would still be a cheaper way to play something like COD MP compared to the other consoles....
 
I call bullshit. Random Redditor "I have my sources" making completely milquetoast claims and making price guesses. I remember when fake leaks at least used to be fun
 
RoadHazard said:
1080p and 2K are the same thing. Do they mean 1440p docked?

"2K" isn't really a thing in terms of TV resolutions at all.
Click to expand...

Think most mean 1440p when they say 2k but you are correct. If it is true that they can render 1440p and get 60 fps then I'm immediately interested. Hopefully that will apply to old games. without having to have them all be patched, but I doubt it.
 
squidilix said:
499$
Online price hikes without games
69$/79€ games

NKids gonna love the new Nintendo.
Click to expand...
Nintendo kids haven't bought a new Nintendo system since the 90s, I reckon.

These days Nintendo consoles are a bit expensive for kids (not to mention smartphones are way more popular), so it's mostly adults with Nintendo nostalgia that buy them.
 
Is Switch 2 powerful enough to run BotW at 2K@60fps?

I know the proportion is not linear, but the calculation says it should render 2x more pixels at 2x higher resolution.
 
It is a random Twitter account that posts whatever they want to their 2k followers. It's obviously fake.
But let's say it is real...I do not think Switch online is worth $70. $50 is ok, but that is kind of stretching it. Online+cloud saves+roms isn't really a great value. $50 is cheap enough that I don't think much about it even though the value probably isn't there. Once things go above that then I start to think on if I would rather save the money or not.
 
How am I supposed to respect anyone that refers to 1440p as 2K? 2.5K is more accurate, and 3K would make more sense marketing wise given that it's the main resolution between 1080p and 2160p. At least stick with QHD and promote a term that has origins rooted in sanity instead of this cuntery.

1080p has more claim to the 2K name than 2160p does to 4K name given it's only 80 pixels short of being 2000 wide vs being 160 short of 4000 wide. How does 2560 even remotely follow the same logic when you're past half way but still rounding down? I can only guess it comes from the same geniuses that named the USB 3 variants.

So no, a $70 NSO is not justified.
 
Negotiator said:
Even if that's the case, is there any chance of keeping the lower tier at $20?

What will happen to NSO subscribers that have stacked up to 3 years of subscription? (I assume they won't be affected, but you never know with Nintendo)

I also hope BoTW Remastered doesn't mean paying another $70 instead of a free patch, but it looks like they want to copy Sony's strategy.

Risky moves, these could affect Switch 2's success. More so if it's priced at $499 due to tariffs.
Click to expand...
Rawbutt Jellybean said:
Looks like in both images it's talking about the Expansion Pass. Hopefully that means GC or Wii games are coming.
Click to expand...
GoldenEye98 said:
That's what it reads as...

If the base NSO is still $20/yr that's not so bad at all.

Would still be a cheaper way to play something like COD MP compared to the other consoles....
Click to expand...
Yeah, OP and another post seemed to think otherwise but to me it just came across as a $20 increase for the expansion pass which if they are adding in GameCube and Wii or even just GameCube (I've literally finished like 2 games on Wii being Fragile Dreams and Fatal Frame 2) I'm not that mad about it.

I doubt the standard tier stays at $20 but I also doubt it goes any higher then $30/$40.

Physiognomonics said:
2K docked means no DLSS.
Click to expand...
It is probably just using DLSS to upscale something like 1080p (or even 720p 😩) to an output resolution of 1440p.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

  • Poll
Nintendo backtracking the game prices increase?
Poll  2 3
103
4K
username12 replied
GameCube is coming to Nintendo Switch Online + Expansion Pack
News  2 3
142
5K
darrylgorn replied
KOEI shares some love to Nintendo Switch Online
11
575
bender replied
Silksong is coming to both Nintendo Switch and Nintendo Switch 2
News 
23
609
Kataploom replied
Zelda Switch 2 Edition Upgrades Will Be Free with Nintendo Switch Online Expansion Pack
2
64
3K
Mephisto40 replied
Top Bottom