1. Seriously, talk about a change of heart.

You know, I'm not all that sure I've heard them talk much about Revolution's online multiplayer capabilities. Lots of info about the virtual console, but not much concerning multiplayer. All I remember is that it's supposed to mirror the DS service. As long as I get some WiFi Smash Bros. on, I'll be happy.

Posted at 4:24PM on Mar 28th 2006 by Sense 6 stars

2. "The Nintendo Wi-Fi service is certainly taking off with gusto--and this from a company that once claimed gamers weren't interested in all those online shenanigans. "

Not interested in PAYING for them. And clearly they're not.

Posted at 6:34PM on Mar 28th 2006 by Dave 0 stars

3.
I can understand Nintendo's original decision not to go for online gaming - Japan has a problem with social isolation already (aka Hikikimori) so why would Nintendo want to give people another reason to stay indoors?

Let's just hope the original fears of causing more social isolation do not evntuate from this gusto of online gaming.

Posted at 7:08PM on Mar 28th 2006 by amiga_tone 0 stars

4. I think that the 40 Wi-Fi titles is a great choice. I just wish they would lower the price of that darn usb Wi-Fi connector for those who don't have wireless at home, or is too lazy/unable to take advantage of the hotspots.

Posted at 7:16PM on Mar 28th 2006 by Joey 1 star

5. Oh Jesus, hikikOmori has nothing to do with. Why the hell would Nintendo care about that? They're a business, not a charity.

Posted at 7:17PM on Mar 28th 2006 by Dave 0 stars

6. More bullshit about Nintendo being afraid of technology...

They were waiting until they could get costs down so they could HAVE a free online service. Charging people would have been feasible, but it means only a small fraction of users get online. They wanted everyone online, and having hotspots pervasive and broadband internet pervasive... this took a while but it's finally here.. Nintendo's usage rates blow MS's out of the water; they're shooting for 80-90% usage rates of online.

Stop making stuff up, they've always been technological leaders, they were just patient. No one EVER said online gaming was a waste of time or a bad idea..

Posted at 7:29PM on Mar 28th 2006 by mike 1 star

7. If Nintendo Wi-fi remains free, it will STOMP any other online console service for sure.

Posted at 7:55PM on Mar 28th 2006 by Loban 0 stars

8. Nintendo said gamers weren't read y for it because they tried it several times and it never took off. The Famicom (NES) had a rather robuse itnernet setup, even to the point of having online shopping laid out. The problem was, until recently, the backbones weren't in place and the tech just wasn't as affordable as it is now. I'll take the wait Nintendo's had to bring WiFi to the US for the price they offer it at.

Posted at 12:34AM on Mar 29th 2006 by daroga 0 stars

9. the dreamcast shipped with a modem, so obviously online play was a robust and assuredly stakes claiming issue that cemented victory for any console in the 'next gen' of old. man, i just don't know what to call this era. i won't call it hd because i hate sony, so it's got to be the revolution genorution. or net gen. HOLY CRAP. I DID IT. the new generation of consoles is going to be the NET GEN. i coined the phrase. i did it! everybody use that. DSFANBOY needs to start promoting it.
holy crap i just undermined my entire argument about net being an important feature.

Posted at 1:24AM on Mar 29th 2006 by jadenguy 0 stars

10. Nintendo NEVER said they had no interest in online services. They just said the market wasn't ready 5 years ago. Microsoft dove into full thrust and didn't have much to show for it by the end of the xbox's run. As mike said costs have come down, more importantly there are enough dsl/cable subscribers to make it economically viable. 5 years ago I had only just gotten my cable modem and i'm a computer geek. Today the people who call me when their computers won't start also have cable. 5 years ago most people had dialup and you can't do decent online with dialup.

Nintendo took a look at it and said "maybe later". You see them doing the same thing today, much has been made about the revolution not supporting true HD. Most people don't have HD yet and even those who do often don't have their consoles contected to the "really good" tv in the house. For all the boasts about whether the 360 or the ps3 is more powerful, anyone without HDTV isn't gonna notice the new "mind blowing" graphics on these new systems. HDTV won't be widespread for at least another 5 years by then nintendo will have a console that runs in HD. until the revolution's graphics are gonna look just as good as the other 2... to the majority of people.

Posted at 4:06AM on Mar 29th 2006 by skyrous 0 stars

11. For the sake of debate, you could say that choices like Microsoft's helped drive cable and DSL penetration. We're talking a pretty small percentage, but still some help.

Nintendo may be good at catering to the masses. In fact, they're great at it. However, there were lot's of people who were ready for online gaming last generation. I was one of them (hell, I was online with the Dreamcast).

And Microsoft had a lot of LIVE subscribers. Sure, it was a small percentage of the Xbox base, but we're talking over a million people. I would imagine that is economically viable for Microsoft. A million people paying $60 US a year is not chump change.

Anyway, my two cents.

(by the way, I love Nintendo and the DS. I just never agreed with the Gamecube online strategy.)

Posted at 9:10AM on Mar 29th 2006 by Sense 6 stars

12. Some interesting responses - some I agree with, others I don't. I think another post delving into this issue might be a worthwhile pursuit.

To mike:
"More bullshit about Nintendo being afraid of technology..."

If you're referring to my post, you're reading something into it that isn't there. "and this from a company that once claimed gamers weren't interested in all those online shenanigans" is in reference to one of Satoru Iwata's past keynotes where he said that users would not be interested in the costs and requirements of online gaming. I certainly didn't make that up. I am, however, allowed to disagree. :)

Posted at 9:12AM on Mar 29th 2006 by Ludwig Kietzmann 0 stars

13. LUDWIG... DID YOU SAY STEAK???? Now you got me all excited!

Posted at 12:34PM on Mar 29th 2006 by Babu 0 stars

14. Everyone is always saying how Nintendo in innovative and pushing the envelope. But let’s give credit where credit is due. While Microsoft did not pioneer the idea of online gaming, they certainly were the people who pushed it out to the fore front. And their ideas in implementing it have been incredible. The idea of one gamer tag for any game that you play online was worth the $4.08 a month alone. Being able to patch and update content online is really REALLY nice. And while PS2 did go online it is no where near the experience that you get on LIVE.

Everyone always rips on Microsoft for charging for Xbox live, but nobody ever mentions that all you need to do is buy an Xbox 360 and you get a free silver account. Just like you have to buy a DS to get Nintendo WiFi.

All of these services that are boasting free online I say watch out. It will become a very low priority to these companies to improve or maintain these online services when they are not generating revenue. Paying a small fee of $4.00 or $5.00 a month really is nothing when you talk about spending at least $40 on a video game itself. And an even worse scenario is that these companies will start selling advertising on their services to pay for it. I will say I am not very excited about having to endure a 30 second commercial every time I start a new game online. Or having tons of banner ads chewing up bandwidth. The advertising industry is looking very hard to get at the gamers, they feel they are loosing allot people to online gaming. They are worried that gamers who spend hours online are not watching TV as much, or listening to the radio, to catch the ads that they are creating and thus get their customers the sales they project and promise.

Hey I have a DS and love playing Mario Kart on it even though I suck at it. But to everyone who thinks these console companies can afford to keep massive server farms running and keep connection speeds up without it generating some sort of revenue I just do not see it happening.

Posted at 1:40PM on Mar 29th 2006 by Jim N 0 stars

15. More importantly there are enough Cable subscribers to make it economically viable

Posted at 8:37AM on Mar 30th 2006 by hermes 0 stars

16. A million people paying $80 US/year is not chump change.

Posted at 8:53AM on Mar 30th 2006 by timmy 0 stars

17. "Everyone always rips on Microsoft for charging for Xbox live, but nobody ever mentions that all you need to do is buy an Xbox 360 and you get a free silver account. Just like you have to buy a DS to get Nintendo WiFi."

That's awesome, except one thing. The silver account doesn't actually let you PLAY online. It gives arcade and an account and stuff, but not the one thing that's actually important.

Posted at 6:51PM on Mar 30th 2006 by Zenkin 0 stars

18. PS2 did go online it is no where near the experience.

Posted at 6:58AM on Mar 31st 2006 by lawson 0 stars

19. "By the beginning of 2007 there will be 40 Wi-Fi Connection compatible games in development, including Winning Eleven."

Yes , we are clearly in the beginning of 2007 _now_

Posted at 11:12AM on Apr 2nd 2006 by buZz 0 stars