Disapointed with the Pokemon paywall, will this end up affecting the WIiU aswell

#1BkzIzuPosted 9/4/2013 4:35:59 PM
So on todays Pokemon/Nintendo Direct there was a new feature which allowed you to store your pokemon online which is great and all but the problem is you have to pay a yearly subscription to use it...
This pissed me off, these features should be with the game for free but now that Nintendo ended up adding a paywall for the pokemon games do you think they'll end up putting stuff like Netflix,youtube,etc. behind a paywall as well? Also this kinda insinuates that Nintendo might actually put the mutiplayer behind behind a paywall with their next console. (They can't do with the WiiU because let's face it, the online is inferior compared to it's competitor) but this doesn't stop it when Nintendo ends up actually improving their online system.
#2T3H_1337_N1NJ4Posted 9/4/2013 4:37:50 PM
It's not required. The idea is to maintain the servers with the pokémons for all future pokémon games. 5$ per year is nothing for that.
---
To err is human, but to really screw things up you need a computer!
http://userstyles.org/styles/88555/gamefaqs-v13-revamp V13 Userstyle for a better site look
#3BloodychessPosted 9/4/2013 4:38:39 PM
Do you buy MS? Sony?

If so, stop complaining about paywalls. You survived those, you'll survive this if the moon turns blue and you decide to get the game.
---
Give weeds an inch and they'll take a yard.
#4LemonKweenstaaaPosted 9/4/2013 4:39:27 PM(edited)
The Pokemon storage is optional, and isn't necessary to properly enjoy the game. Its also $5 a year, which equates to about 47 cents per month.

If Nintendo does implement these "paywalls" in the same fashion as Pokemon, then the only people who will suffer are kids who don't have a credit card or parents.
---
~President of the Persona 4 Golden board~
#5BkzIzu(Topic Creator)Posted 9/4/2013 4:39:17 PM
T3H_1337_N1NJ4 posted...
The idea is to maintain the servers with the pokémons for all future pokémon games. 5$ per year is nothing for that.


Do you think Nintendo will make you pay for multiplayer later on when their online is improved? They'll have to maintain servers for their games aswell.
#6NCPwnPosted 9/4/2013 4:40:16 PM
It's funny how Blizzard provided Battle.net for free 20 years ago and managed your data for Diablo 2 servers. But I guess a database for your pokemon is expensive stuff.
---
Top 10 Favorite games of all time (in order):
NIER, Zelda WW, Secret of Mana, Zelda OoT, Rainbow Moon, Valkyria Chronicles, DAOC, MAG, Tachyon, Myst
#7BloodychessPosted 9/4/2013 4:41:53 PM
BkzIzu posted...
T3H_1337_N1NJ4 posted...
The idea is to maintain the servers with the pokémons for all future pokémon games. 5$ per year is nothing for that.


Do you think Nintendo will make you pay for multiplayer later on when their online is improved? They'll have to maintain servers for their games aswell.


Sony model?
---
Give weeds an inch and they'll take a yard.
#8random_man9119Posted 9/4/2013 4:46:03 PM
It's optional...

If you absolutely had to pay to transfer your Pokemon between games, it'd be different...
---
PSN: Des-Nos|3DS FC: 1375 7442 7348
NNID: MrOddities|ACNL: Odd from Utopia
#9BkzIzu(Topic Creator)Posted 9/4/2013 4:47:30 PM
[This message was deleted at the request of the original poster]
#10MikeisapoetPosted 9/4/2013 4:48:44 PM
You don't need this service, it's optional, you can transfer them the old-fashioned way, the money is to keep the servers up, there's no indication that Nintendo is doing this full-on in the future. You're just looking for ways to stir the pot, and you've done unfortunately well.
---
If you were to ask me what kind of person I was, I'd tell you I listen to dubstep, country, rap and thrash metal. I think that makes me a pretty level person.